Writings of Augustine. A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians.

Advanced Information

Augustin and the Pelagian Controversy.

A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians.

Published in 1886 by Philip Schaff,
New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co.

Extract from Augustin's "Retractations," Book II. Chap. 61,

On the Following Treatise, "contra duas epistolas pelagianorum."

Then follow four books which I wrote to Boniface, bishop of the Roman
Church, in opposition to two letters of the Pelagians, because when
they came into his hands he had sent them to me, finding in them a
calumnious mention of my name. This work commences on this wise: "I
had indeed known you by the praise of your renowned fame."

A Treatise against two Letters of the Pelagians, [2526]

by Aurelius Augustin, Bishop of Hippo;

In Four Books,

written to boniface, bishop of the roman church, in opposition to two
letters of the pelagians, a.d. 420, or a little later

Book I.

Augustin replies to a letter sent by Julian, as it was said, to Rome;
and first of all vindicates the catholic doctrine from his calumnies;
then discovers and confutes the heretical sense of the Pelagians
hidden in that profession of faith which the author of the letter
opposed to the catholics.

Chapter 1.--Introduction: Address to Boniface.

I Had indeed known you by the praise of your renowned fame; and by
very numerous and veracious messengers I had learned how full you were
of the grace of God, most blessed and venerable Pope Boniface! But
after my brother Alypius saw you even in bodily presence; and, having
been received by you with all kindness and sincerity, held, at the
bidding of affection, conversations with you; and living with you,
and, although only for a short time, united with you in earnest
affection, poured out to your mind both himself and me; and brought
you back to me in his mind:--the more assured was your friendship, the
greater became in me the conviction of your holiness. For you, who
mind not high things, however loftily you are placed, did not disdain
to be a friend of the lowly and to return the love bestowed upon you.
For what else is friendship which has its name from no other source
than love, [2527] and is nowhere faithful but in Christ, in whom alone
it can be eternal and happy? Whence, also, having received a greater
assurance by means of that brother, through whom I have learned to
know you more familiarly, I have ventured to write something to your
blessedness concerning those things which at this juncture are
claiming by a later stimulus the episcopal care, as far as we are
able, to vigilance on behalf of the Lord's flock.

Footnotes

[2527] The Latin words being amicitia (friendship) and amor (love).

Chapter 2.--Why Heretical Writings Must Be Answered.

For the new heretics, enemies of the grace of God which is given by
Jesus Christ our Lord to small and great, although they are already
shown more openly to need to be avoided by a manifest disapprobation,
still do not cease by their writings to try the hearts of the less
cautious and less learned. And these must certainly be answered, lest
they should confirm themselves or their friends in that wicked error;
even if we were not afraid that they might deceive some one of the
catholics by their plausible discourse. But since they do not cease to
growl at the entrances to the Lord's fold, and from every side to tear
open approaches with a view to tear in pieces the sheep redeemed at
such a price; and since the pastoral watch-tower is common to all of
us who discharge the office of the episcopate (although you are
prominent therein on a loftier height), I do what I can in respect of
my small portion of the charge, as the Lord condescends by the aid of
your prayers to grant me power, to oppose to their pestilent and
crafty writings, healing and defensive writings, so that the madness
with which they are raging may either itself be cured, or may be
prevented from hurting others.

Chapter 3.--Why He Addresses His Book to Boniface.

But these words which I am answering to their two letters,--the one,
to wit, which Julian is said to have sent to Rome, that by its means,
as I believe, he might find or make as many allies as he could; and
the other, which eighteen so-called bishops, sharers in his error,
dared to write to Thessalonica, not to any and every body, but to the
bishop of that place itself, with a view of tempting him by their
craftiness and bringing him over, if it could be done, to their
views;--these words which, as I said, I am writing in answer to those
two letters of theirs in respect of that argument, I have determined
to address especially to your sanctity, not so much for your learning
as for your examination and, if perchance anything should displease
you, for your correction. For my brother intimated to me that you
yourself condescended to give those letters to him, which could not
come into your hands except by the most watchful diligence of my
brethren, your sons. And I thank your most sincere kindness to me that
you have been unwilling that those letters of the enemies of God's
grace should be hidden from me, seeing that in them you have found my
name calumniously as well as openly expressed. But I hope from my Lord
God that not without the reward which is in heaven do those tear me
with their scurrilous teeth to whom I oppose myself on behalf of the
little ones, that they may not be left for destruction to the
deceitful flatterer Pelagius, but may be presented for deliverance to
the truthful Saviour Christ.

Chapter 4 [II.]--The Calumny of Julian,--That the Catholics Teach that
Free Will is Taken Away by Adam's Sin.

Let us now, therefore, reply to Julian's letter. "Those Manicheans
say," says he, "with whom now we do not communicate,--that is, the
whole of them with whom we differ,--that by the sin of the first man,
that is, of Adam, free will perished: and that no one has now the
power of living well, but that all are constrained into sin by the
necessity of their flesh." He calls the catholics Manicheans, after
the manner of that Jovinian who a few years ago, as a new heretic,
destroyed the virginity of the blessed Mary, and placed the marriage
of the faithful on the same level with her sacred virginity. And he
did not object this to the catholics on any other ground than that he
wished them to seem to be either accusers or condemners of marriage.

Chapter 5.--Free Choice Did Not Perish With Adam 's Sin. What Freedom
Did Perish.

But in defending free will they hasten to confide rather in it for
doing righteousness than in God's aid, and to glory every one in
himself, and not in the Lord. [2528] But who of us will say that by
the sin of the first man free will perished from the human race?
Through sin freedom indeed perished, but it was that freedom which was
in Paradise, to have a full righteousness with immortality; and it is
on this account that human nature needs divine grace, since the Lord
says, "If the Son shall make you free, then shall ye be free indeed"
[2529] --free of course to live well and righteously. For free will in
the sinner up to this extent did not perish,--that by it all sin,
especially they who sin with delight and with love of sin; what they
are pleased to do gives them pleasure. Whence also the apostle says,
"When ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness."
[2530] Behold, they are shown to have been by no means able to serve
sin except by another freedom. They are not, then, free from
righteousness except by the choice of the will, but they do not become
free from sin save by the grace of the Saviour. For which reason the
admirable Teacher also distinguished these very words: "For when ye
were the servants," says he, "of sin, ye were free from righteousness.
What fruit had ye, then, in those things whereof ye are now ashamed?
for the end of those things is death. But now being freed from sin and
become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end
eternal life." [2531] He called them "free" from righteousness, not
"freed;" but from sin not "free," lest they should attribute this to
themselves, but most watchfully he preferred to say "freed," referring
this to that declaration of the Lord, "If the Son shall make you free,
then shall ye be free indeed." [2532] Since, then, the sons of men do
not live well unless they are made the sons of God, why is it that
this writer wishes to give the power of good living to free will, when
this power is not given save by God's grace through Jesus Christ our
Lord, as the gospel says: "And as many as received Him, to them gave
He power to become the sons of God"? [2533]

Footnotes

Chapter 6 [III.]--Grace is Not Given According to Merits.

But lest perchance they say that they are aided to this,--that they
may "have power to become the sons of God," but that they may deserve
to receive this power they have first "received Him" by free will with
no assistance of grace (because this is the purpose of their endeavour
to destroy grace, that they may contend that it is given according to
our deservings); lest perchance, then, they so divide that evangelical
statement as to refer merit to that portion of it wherein it is said,
"But as many as received Him," and then say that in that which
follows, "He gave them power to become the sons of God," grace is not
given freely, but is repaid to this merit; if it is asked of them what
is the meaning of "received Him," will they say anything else than
"believed on Him"? And in order, therefore, that they may know that
this also pertains to grace, let them read what the apostle says: "And
that ye be in nothing terrified by your adversaries, which indeed is
to them a cause of perdition, but of your salvation, and that of God;
for unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ not only to believe
on Him, but also to suffer for His sake." [2534] Certainly he said
that both were given. Let them read what he said also: "Peace be to
the brethren, and love, with faith from God the Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ." [2535] Let them also read what the Lord Himself says:
"No man can come to me, except the Father who hath sent me shall draw
him." [2536] Where, lest any one should suppose that anything else is
said in the words "come to me" than "believe in me," a little after,
when He was speaking of His body and blood, and many were offended at
His discourse, He says, "The words which I have spoken unto you are
spirit and life; but there are some of you which believe not." [2537]
Then the Evangelist added, "For Jesus knew from the beginning who they
were that believed, and who should betray Him. And He said, Therefore
I said unto you that no man can come unto me except it were given him
of my Father." [2538] He repeated, to wit, the saying in which He had
said, "No man can come unto me, except the Father who hath sent me
shall draw him." And He declared that He said this for the sake of
believers and unbelievers, explaining what He had said, "except the
Father who hath sent me shall draw him," by repeating the very same
thing in other words in that which He said, "except it were given him
of my Father." Because he is drawn to Christ to whom it is given to
believe on Christ. Therefore the power is given that they who believe
on Him should become the sons of God, since this very thing is given,
that they believe on Him. And unless this power be given from God, out
of free will there can be none; because it will not be free for good
if the deliverer have not made it free; but in evil he has a free will
in whom a deceiver, either secret or manifest, has grafted the love of
wickedness, or he himself has persuaded himself of it.

Footnotes

Chapter 7.--He Concludes that He Does Not Deprive the Wicked of Free
Will.

It is not, therefore, true, as some affirm that we say, and as that
correspondent of yours ventures moreover to write, that "all are
forced into sin," as if they were unwilling, "by the necessity of
their flesh;" but if they are already of the age to use the choice of
their own mind, they are both retained in sin by their own will, and
by their own will are hurried along from sin to sin. For even he who
persuades and deceives does not act in them, except that they may
commit sin by their will, either by ignorance of the truth or by
delight in iniquity, or by both evils,--as well of blindness as of
weakness. But this will, which is free in evil things because it takes
pleasure in evil, is not free in good things, for the reason that it
has not been made free. Nor can a man will any good thing unless he is
aided by Him who cannot will evil,--that is, by the grace of God
through Jesus Christ our Lord. For "everything which is not of faith
is sin." [2539] And thus the good will which withdraws itself from sin
is faithful, because the just lives by faith. [2540] And it pertains
to faith to believe on Christ. And no man can believe on Christ--that
is, come to Him--unless it be given to him. [2541] No man, therefore,
can have a righteous will, unless, with no foregoing merits, he has
received the true, that is, the gratuitous grace from above.

Footnotes

[2539] Rom. xiv. 23.
[2540] Hab. ii. 4.
[2541] Rom. i. 17.

Chapter 8 [IV.]--The Pelagians Demolish Free Will.

These proud and haughty people will not have this; and yet they do not
maintain free will by purifying it, but demolish it by exaggerating
it. For they are angry with us who say these things, for no other
reason than that they disdain to glory in the Lord. Yet Pelagius
feared the episcopal judgment of Palestine; and when it was objected
to him that he said that the grace of God is given according to our
merits, he denied that he said so, and condemned those who said this
with an anathema. [2542] And yet nothing else is found to be defended
in the books which he afterwards wrote, thinking that he had made a
fraud upon the men who were his judges, by lying or by hiding his
meaning, I know not how, in ambiguous words. [2543]

Footnotes

[2542] On the Proceedings of Pelagius, 30.
[2543] On the Grace of Christ, 3, 34.

Chapter 9 [V.]--Another Calumny of Julian,--That "It is Said that
Marriage is Not Appointed by God."

But now let us see what follows. "They say also," he says, "that those
marriages which are now celebrated were not appointed by God, and this
is to be read in Augustin's book, [2544] against which I replied in
four books. And the words of this Augustin our enemies have taken up
by way of hostility to the truth." To these most calumnious words I
see that a brief answer must be made, because he repeats them
afterwards when he wishes to insinuate what such men as they would
say, as if against my words. On that point, with God's assistance, I
must contend with him as far as the matter shall seem to demand. Now,
therefore, I reply that marriage was ordained by God both then, when
it was said, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother,
and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh,"
[2545] and now, wherefore it is written, "A woman is joined to a man
by the Lord." [2546] For nothing else is even now done than that a man
cleave to his wife, and they become two in one flesh. Because
concerning that very marriage which is now contracted, the Lord was
consulted by the Jews whether it was lawful for any cause to put away
a wife. And to the testimony of the law on the occasion mentioned, He
added, "What, therefore, God hath joined together, let not man put
asunder." [2547] The Apostle Paul also applied this witness of the law
when he admonished husbands that their wives should be loved by them.
[2548] Away, then, with the notion that in my book that man should
read anything opposed to these divine testimonies! But either by not
understanding, or rather by calumniating, he seeks to twist what he
reads into another meaning. But I wrote my book, against which he
mentions that he replied in four books, after the condemnation of
Pelagius and Coelestius. And this, I have thought, must be said,
because that man avers that my words had been taken up by his enemies
in hostility to the truth, lest any one should think that these new
heretics were condemned as enemies of the grace of Christ on account
of this book of mine. But in that book is found the defence rather
than the censure of marriage.

Footnotes

Chapter 10--The Third Calumny,--The Assertion that Conjugal
Intercourse is Condemned.

"They say also," says he, "that sexual impulse and the intercourse of
married people were devised by the devil, and that therefore those who
are born innocent are guilty, and that it is the work of the devil,
not of God, that they are born of this diabolical intercourse. And
this, without any ambiguity, is Manicheism." Nay, as I say that
marriage was appointed by God for the sake of the ordinance of the
begetting of children, so I say that the propagation of children to be
begotten could not have taken place without sexual impulse, and
without intercourse of husband and wife, even in Paradise, if children
were begotten there. But whether such impulse and intercourse would
have existed, as is now the case with shameful lust, if no one had
sinned, here is the question concerning which I shall argue hereafter,
if God will.

Chapter 11 [VI.]--The Purpose of the Pelagians in Praising the
Innocence of Conjugal Intercourse.

Yet what it is they wish, what they purpose, to what result they are
striving to bring the matter, the words that are added by that writer
declare, when he asserts that I say, "that therefore they who are born
innocent are guilty, and that it is the work of the devil, not of God,
that they are born of this diabolical intercourse." Since, therefore,
I neither say that this intercourse of husband and wife is diabolical,
especially in the case of believers, which is effected for the sake of
generating children who are afterwards to be regenerated; nor that any
men are made by the devil, but, in so far as they are men, by God; and
nevertheless that even of believing husband and wife are born guilty
persons (as if a wild olive were produced from an olive), [2549] on
account of original sin, and on this account they are under the devil
unless they are born again in Christ, because the devil is the author
of the fault, not of the nature: what, on the other hand, are they
labouring to bring about who say that infants inherit no original sin,
and therefore are not under the devil, except that that grace of God
in infants may be made of no effect, by which He has plucked us out,
as the apostle says, from the power of darkness, and has translated us
into the kingdom of the Son of His love? [2550] [VII.] When, indeed,
they deny that infants are in the power of darkness even before the
help of the Lord the deliverer, they are in such wise praising in them
the Creator's work as to destroy the mercy of the Redeemer. And
because I confess this both in grown-up people and in infants, he says
that this is without any ambiguity Manicheism, although it is the most
ancient catholic dogma by which the new heretical dogma of these men
is overturned.

Footnotes

[2549] On Marriage and Concupiscence, i. 37.
[2550] 1 Cor. i. 13.

Chapter 12.--The Fourth Calumny,--That the Saints of the Old Testament
are Said to Be Not Free from Sins.

"They say," says he, "that the saints in the Old Testament were not
without sins,--that is that they were not free from crimes even by
amendment, but they were seized by death in their guilt." Nay, I say
that either before the law, or in the time of the Old Testament, they
were freed from sins,--not by their own power, because "cursed is
every one that hath put his hope in man," [2551] and without any doubt
those are under this curse whom also the sacred Psalm notifies, "who
trust in their own strength;" [2552] nor by the old covenant which
gendereth to bondage, [2553] although it was divinely given by the
grace of a sure dispensation; nor by that law itself, holy and just
and good as it was, where it is written, "Thou shalt not covet,"
[2554] since it was not given as being able to give life, but it was
added for the sake of transgression until the seed should come to whom
the promise was made; but I say that they were freed by the blood of
the Redeemer Himself, who is the one Mediator of God and man, the man
Christ Jesus. [2555] But those enemies of the grace of God, which is
given to small and great through Jesus Christ our Lord, say that the
men of God of old were of a perfect righteousness, lest they should be
supposed to have needed the incarnation, the passion, and resurrection
of Christ, by belief in whom they were saved.

Footnotes

Chapter 13 [VIII.]--The Fifth Calumny,--That It is Said that Paul and
the Rest of the Apostles Were Polluted by Lust.

He says, "They say that even the Apostle Paul, even all the apostles,
were always polluted by immoderate lust." What man, however profane he
may be, would dare to say this? But doubtless this man thus
misrepresents because they contend that what the apostle said, "I know
that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing, for to will
is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not,"
[2556] and other such things, he said not of himself, but that he
introduced the person of somebody else, I know not who, who was
suffering these things. Wherefore that passage in his epistle must be
carefully considered and investigated, that their error may not lurk
in any obscurity of his. Although, therefore, the apostle is here
arguing broadly, and with great and lasting conflict maintaining grace
against those who were boasting in the law, yet we do come upon a few
matters which pertain to the matter in hand. On which subject he says:
"Because by the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight.
For by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of
God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the
prophets, even the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ
unto all them that believe. For there is no difference. For all have
sinned and come short of the glory of God, being justified freely by
His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." [2557] And
again: "Where is boasting? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No;
but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified
by faith without the works of the law." [2558] And again: "For the
promise that he should be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or
to his seed through the law, but by the righteousness of faith. For if
they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the
promise made of none effect. Because the law worketh wrath, for where
no law is, there is no transgression." [2559] And in another place:
"Moreover, the law entered that the offence might abound. But where
sin abounded grace did much more abound." [2560] In still another
place: "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under
law, but under grace." [2561] And again in another place: "Know ye
not, brethren (for I speak to them that know the law), that the law
hath dominion over a man so long as he liveth? For the woman which is
under a husband is joined to her husband by the law so long as he
liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is freed from the law of her
husband." [2562] And a little after: "Therefore, my brethren, ye also
are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should
belong to another, who has risen from the dead that we should bring
forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh the passions of
sins which are by the law did work in our members to bring forth fruit
unto death, but now we are delivered from the law of death in which we
were held, so that we may serve in newness of spirit, and not in the
oldness of the letter." [2563] With these and such like testimonies
that teacher of the Gentiles showed with sufficient evidence that the
law could not take away sin, but rather increased it, and that grace
takes it away; since the law knew how to command, to which command
weakness gives way, while grace knows to assist, whereby love is
infused. [2564] And lest any one, on account of these testimonies,
should reproach the law, and contend that it is evil, the apostle,
seeing what might occur to those who ill understand it, himself
proposed to himself the same question. "What shall we say, then?" said
he. "Is the law sin? Far from it. But I did not know sin except by the
law." [2565] He had already said before, "For by the law is the
knowledge of sin." It is not, therefore, the taking away, but the
knowledge of sin.

Chapter 14.--That the Apostle is Speaking in His Own Person and that
of Others Who Are Under Grace, Not Still Under Law.

And from this point he now begins--and, it was on account of this that
I undertook the consideration of these things--to introduce his own
person, and to speak as if about himself; where the Pelagians will not
have it that the apostle himself is to be understood, but say that he
has transfigured another person into himself,--that is, a man placed
still under the law, not yet freed by grace. And here, indeed, they
ought at least to concede that "in the law no one is justified," as
the same apostle says elsewhere; but that the law avails for the
knowledge of sin, and for the transgression of the law itself, so that
sin, being known and increased, grace may be sought for through faith.
But they do not fear that those things should be understood concerning
the apostle which he might also say concerning his past, but they fear
those things which follow. For here he says: "I had not known lust if
the law had not said, Thou shall not covet. But the occasion being
taken, sin wrought in me by the commandment all manner of lust. For
without the law sin was dead. But I was alive without the law once,
but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died, and the
commandment which was for life was found for me to be death. For sin,
taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
Therefore the law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy, just, and
good. Was, then, that which is good made death unto me? By no means.
But sin, that it might appear sin, worked death to me by that which is
good, that the sinner or the sin might become by the commandment
excessive." All these things, as I have said, the apostle can seem to
have commemorated from his past life: so that from what he says, "For
I was alive without the law once," he may have wished his first age
from infancy to be understood, before the years of reason; but in that
he added, "But when the commandment came, sin revived, but I died," he
would fain show himself able to receive the commandment, but not to do
it, and therefore a transgressor of the law.

Chapter 15 [IX.]--He Sins in Will Who is Only Deterred from Sinning by
Fear.

Nor let us be disturbed by what he wrote to the Philippians: "Touching
the righteousness which is in the law, one who is without blame." For
he could be within in evil affections a transgressor of the law, and
yet fulfil the open works of the law, either by the fear of men or of
God Himself; but by terror of punishment, not by love and delight in
righteousness. For it is one thing to do good with the will of doing
good, and another thing to be so inclined by the will to do evil, that
one would actually do it if it could be allowed without punishment.
For thus assuredly he is sinning within in his will itself, who
abstains from sin not by will but by fear. And knowing himself to have
been such in these his internal affections, before the grace of God
which is through Jesus Christ our Lord, the apostle elsewhere
confesses this very plainly. For writing to the Ephesians, he says:
"And you, though ye were dead in your trespasses and sins, wherein
sometime ye walked according to the course of this world, according to
the prince of the power of the air, of that spirit that now worketh in
the children of disobedience, in whom also we all at one time had our
conversation in the lusts of our flesh, doing the will of our flesh
and our affections, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as
others also: but God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love
wherewith He loved us even when we were dead in sins, quickened us
together with Christ, by whose grace we are saved." Again to Titus he
says: "For we ourselves also were sometime foolish and unbelieving,
erring, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and
envy, hateful, and holding one another in hatred." Such was Saul when
he says that he was, touching the righteousness which is in the law,
without reproach. For that he had not pressed on in the law, and
changed his character so as to be without reproach after this hateful
life, he plainly shows in what follows, when he says that he was not
changed from these evils except by the grace of the Saviour. For
adding also this very thing, here as well as to the Ephesians, he
says: "But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour shone forth,
not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His
mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and of the renewal
of the Holy Spirit, whom He shed on us most abundantly, through Jesus
Christ our Saviour, that being justified by His grace we should be
made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

Chapter 16.--How Sin Died, and How It Revived.

And what he says in that passage of the Epistle to the Romans, "Sin,
that it might appear sin, wrought death to me by that which is good,"
[2566] agrees with the former passages where he said, "But I had not
known sin but by the law, for I had not known lust unless the law had
said, Thou shalt not covet." [2567] And previously, "By the law is the
knowledge of sin," for he said this also here, "that it might appear
sin;" that we might not understand what he had said, "For without law
sin was dead," except in the sense as if it were not, "it lies hidden,
it does not appear, it is completely ignored, as if it were buried in
I know not what darkness of ignorance." And in that he says, "And I
was alive once without the law," what does he say except, I seemed to
myself to live? And with respect to what he added, "But when the
commandment came, sin revived," what else is it but sin shone forth,
became apparent? Nor yet does he say lived, but revived. For it had
lived formerly in Paradise, where it sufficiently appeared, admitted
in opposition to the command given; but when it is inherited by
children coming into the world, it lies concealed, as if it were dead,
until its evil, resisting righteousness, is felt by its prohibition,
when one thing is commanded and approved, another thing delights and
rules: then, in some measure sin revives in the knowledge of the man
that is born, although it had lived already for some time in the
knowledge of the man as at first made.

Footnotes

[2566] Rom. vii. 13.
[2567] Rom. vii. 7.

Chapter 17 [X.]--"The Law is Spiritual, But I Am Carnal," To Be
Understood of Paul.

But it is not so clear how what follows can be understood concerning
Paul. "For we know," says he, "that the law is spiritual, but I am
carnal." [2568] He does not say, "I was," but, "I am." Was, then, the
apostle, when he wrote this, carnal? or does he say this with respect
to his body? For he was still in the body of this death, not yet made
what he speaks of elsewhere: "It is sown a natural body, it shall be
raised a spiritual body." [2569] For then, of the whole of himself,
that is, of both parts of which he consists, he shall be a spiritual
man, when even the body shall be spiritual. For it is not absurd that
in that life even the flesh should be spiritual, if in this life in
those who still mind earthly things even the spirit itself may be
carnal. Thus, then, he said, "But I am carnal," because the apostle
had not yet a spiritual body, as he might say, "But I am mortal,"
which assuredly he could not be understood to have said except in
respect of his body, which had not yet been clothed with immortality.
Moreover, in reference to what he added, "sold under sin," [2570] lest
any one think that he was not yet redeemed by the blood of Christ,
this also may be understood in respect of that which he says: "And we
ourselves, having the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves
groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the
redemption of our body." [2571] For if in this respect he says that he
was sold under sin, that as yet his body has not been redeemed from
corruption; or that he was sold once in the first transgression of the
commandment so as to have a corruptible body which drags down the
soul; [2572] what hinders the apostle here from being understood to
say about himself that which he says in such wise that it may be
understood also of himself, even if in his person he wishes not
himself alone, but all, to be received who had known themselves as
struggling, without consent, in spiritual delight with the affection
of the flesh?

Chapter 18.--How the Apostle Said that He Did the Evil that He Would
Not.

Or by chance do we fear what follows, "For that which I do I know not,
for what I will I do not, but what I hate that I do," [2573] lest
perhaps from these words some one should suspect that the apostle is
consenting to the evil works of the concupiscence of the flesh? But we
must consider what he adds: "But if I do that which I will not, I
consent to the law that it is good." For he says that he rather
consents to the law than to the concupiscence of the flesh. For this
he calls by the name of sin. Therefore he said that he acted and
laboured not with the desire of consenting and fulfilling, but from
the impulse of lusting itself. Hence, then, he says, "I consent to the
law that it is good." I consent because I do not will what it does not
will. Afterwards he says, "Now, then, it is no more I that do it, but
sin which dwelleth in me." [2574] What does he mean by "now then,"
but, now at length, under the grace which has delivered the delight of
my will from the consent of lust? For, "it is not I that do it,"
cannot be better understood than that he does not consent to set forth
his members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin. For if he
lusts and consents and acts, how can he be said not to do the thing
himself, even although he may grieve that he does it, and deeply groan
at being overcome?

Footnotes

[2573] Rom. vii. 15.
[2574] Rom. vii. 17.

Chapter 19.--What It is to Accomplish What is Good.

And now does not what follows most plainly show whence he spoke? "For
I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing"?
[2575] For if he had not explained what he said by the addition of
"that is, in my flesh," it might, perchance, be otherwise understood,
when he said, "in me." And therefore he repeats and urges the same
thing in another form: "For to will is present with me, but to perform
that which is good is not." [2576] For this is to perform that which
is good, that a man should not even lust. For the good is incomplete
when one lusts, even although a man does not consent to the evil of
lust. "For the good that I would," says he, "I do not; but the evil
that I would not, that I do. Now, if I do that I would not, it is no
more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." [2577] This he
repeated impressively, and as it were to stir up the most slothful
from slumber: "I find then that the law," said he, "is for me wishing
to do good, since evil is present with me." [2578] The law, then, is
for one who would do good, but evil is present from lust, though he
does not consent to this who says, "It is no longer I that do it."

Footnotes

Chapter 20.--In Me, that Is, in My Flesh.

And he declares both more plainly in what follows: "For I delight in
the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my
members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into
captivity to the law of sin which is in my members." [2579] But in
that he said, "bringing me into captivity," he can feel emotion
without consenting to it. Whence, because of those three things, two,
to wit, of which we have already argued, in that he says, "But I am
carnal," and "Sold under sin," and this third, "Bringing me into
captivity in the law of sin, which is in my members," the apostle
seems to be describing a man who is still living under the law, and is
not yet under grace. But as I have expounded the former two sayings in
respect of the still corruptible flesh, so also this latter may be
understood as if he had said, "bringing me into captivity," in the
flesh, not in the mind; in emotion, not in consent; and therefore
"bringing me into captivity," because even in the flesh there is not
an alien nature, but our own. As, therefore, he himself expounded what
he had said, "For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no
good thing," so also now out of the exposition of that we ought to
learn the meaning of this passage, as if he had said, "Bringing me
into captivity," that is, "my flesh," "to the law of sin, which is in
my members."

Footnotes

[2579] Rom. vii. 21, 22.

Chapter 21.--No Condemnation in Christ Jesus.

Then he adds the reason why he said all these things: "O wretched man
that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? The grace
of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord!" And thence he concludes:
"Therefore I myself with the mind serve the law of God, but with the
flesh the law of sin." [2580] To wit, with the flesh, the law of sin,
by lusting; but with the mind, the law of God, by not consenting to
that lust. "For there is now no condemnation to those who are in
Christ Jesus." [2581] For he is not condemned who does not consent to
the evil of the lust of the flesh. "For the law of the Spirit of life
in Christ Jesus has made thee free from the law of sin and death," so
that, to wit, the lust of the flesh may not appropriate to itself thy
consent. And what follows more and more demonstrates the same meaning.
But moderation must be used.

Footnotes

[2580] Rom. vii. 24, 25.
[2581] Rom. viii. 1.

Chapter 22.--Why the Passage Referred to Must Be Understood of a Man
Established Under Grace.

And it had once appeared to me also that the apostle was in this
argument of his describing a man under the law. [2582] But afterwards
I was constrained to give up the idea by those words where he says,
"Now, then, it is no more I that do it." For to this belongs what he
says subsequently also: "There is, therefore, now no condemnation to
them that are in Christ Jesus." And because I do not see how a man
under the law should say, "I delight in the law of God after the
inward man;" since this very delight in good, by which, moreover, he
does not consent to evil, not from fear of penalty, but from love of
righteousness (for this is meant by "delighting"), can only be
attributed to grace.

Footnotes

[2582] See Augustin's Exposition of Certain Propositions in the
Epistle to the Romans, 44, 45; also his Commentary on Galatians, v.
17; also his letter to Simplicianus, book i. 7, 9.

Chapter 23 [XI.]--What It is to Be Delivered from the Body of This
Death.

For when he says also, "Who shall deliver me from the body of this
death?" [2583] who can deny that when the apostle said this he was
still in the body of this death? And certainly the wicked are not
delivered from this, to whom the same bodies are returned for eternal
torment. Therefore, to be delivered from the body of this death is to
be healed of all the weakness of fleshly lust, and to receive the
body, not for penalty, but for glory. With this passage also those
words are sufficiently in harmony: "Ourselves also, which have the
first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves,
waiting for the adoption, the redemption, of our body." For surely we
groan with that groaning wherein we say, "O wretched man that I am!
who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" That also where he
says, "For what I do, I know not;" what else is it than: "I will not,
I do not approve, I do not consent, I do not do"? Otherwise it is
contrary to what he said above, "By the law is the knowledge of sin,"
and, "I had not known sin but by the law," and, "Sin, that it might
appear sin, worked death in me by that which is good." For how did he
know sin, of which he was ignorant, by the law? How does sin which is
not known appear? Therefore it is said, "I know not," for "I do not,"
because I myself commit it with no consent of mine; in the same way in
which the Lord will say to the wicked, "I know you not," [2584]
although, beyond a doubt, nothing can be hid from Him; and as it is
said, "Him who had not known sin," [2585] which means who had not done
sin, for He had not known what He condemned.

Footnotes

[2583] Rom. vii. 24.
[2584] Matt. vii. 23.
[2585] 2 Cor. v. 21.

Chapter 24.--He Concludes that the Apostle Spoke in His Own Person,
and that of Those Who are Under Grace.

On the careful consideration of these things, and things of the same
kind in the context of that apostolical Scripture, the apostle is
rightly understood to have signified not, indeed, himself alone in his
own person, but others also established under grace, and with him not
yet established in that perfect peace in which death shall be
swallowed up in victory. [2586] And concerning this he afterwards
says, "But if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin, but
the spirit is life because of righteousness. If, then, the Spirit of
Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, He that raised
up Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His
Spirit that dwelleth in you." [2587] Therefore, after our mortal
bodies have been quickened, not only will there be no consent to
sinning, but even the lust of the flesh itself, to which there is no
consent, will not remain. And not to have this resistance to the
spirit in the mortal flesh, was possible only to that man who came not
by the flesh to men. And that the apostles, because they were men, and
carried about in the mortality of this life a body which is corrupted
and weighs down the soul, [2588] were, therefore, "always polluted
with excessive lust," as that man injuriously affirms, be it far from
me to say. But I do say that although they were free from consent to
depraved lusts, they nevertheless groaned concerning the concupiscence
of the flesh, which they bridled by restraint with such humility and
piety, that they desired rather not to have it than to subdue it.

Footnotes

[2586] 1 Cor. xv. 54.
[2587] Rom. viii. 10, 11.
[2588] Wisd. ix. 15.

Chapter 25 [XII.]--The Sixth Calumny,--That Augustin Asserts that Even
Christ Was Not Free from Sins.

In like manner as to what he added, that I say, [2589] "that Christ
even was not free from sins, but that, from the necessity of the
flesh, He spoke falsely, and was stained with other faults," he should
see from whom he heard these things, or in whose letters he read them;
for that, indeed, he perchance did not understand them, and turned
them by the deceitfulness of malice into calumnious meanings.

Footnotes

[2589] See Book iii. 16, below.

Chapter 26 [XIII.]--The Seventh Calumny,--That Augustin Asserts that
in Baptism All Sins are Not Remitted.

"They also say," says he, "that baptism does not give complete
remission of sins, nor take away crimes, but that it shaves them off,
so that the roots of all sins are retained in the evil flesh." Who but
an unbeliever can affirm this against the Pelagians? I say, therefore,
that baptism gives remission of all sins, and takes away guilt, and
does not shave them off; and "that the roots of all sins are" not
"retained in the evil flesh, as if of shaved hair on the head, whence
the sins may grow to be cut down again." For it was I that found out
that similitude, too, for them to use for the purposes of their
calumny, as if I thought and said this.

Chapter 27.--In What Sense Lust is Called Sin in the Regenerate.

But concerning that concupiscence of the flesh of which they speak, I
believe that they are deceived, or that they deceive; for with this
even he that is baptized must struggle with a pious mind, however
carefully he presses forward, and is led by the Spirit of God. But
although this is called sin, it is certainly so called not because it
is sin, but because it is made by sin, as a writing is said to be some
one's "hand" because the hand has written it. But they are sins which
are unlawfully done, spoken, thought, according to the lust of the
flesh, or to ignorance--things which, once done, keep their doers
guilty if they are not forgiven. And this very concupiscence of the
flesh is in such wise put away in baptism, that although it is
inherited by all that are born, it in no respect hurts those that are
born anew. And yet from these, if they carnally beget children, it is
again derived; and again it will be hurtful to those that are born,
unless by the same form it is remitted to them as born again, and
remains in them in no way hindering the future life, because its
guilt, derived by generation, has been put away by regeneration; and
thus it is now no more sin, but is called so, whether because it
became what it is by sin, or because it is stirred by the delight of
sinning, although by the conquest of the delight of righteousness
consent is not given to it. Nor is it on account of this, the guilt of
which has already been taken away in the laver of regeneration, that
the baptized say in their prayer, "Forgive us our debts, as we also
forgive our debtors;" [2590] but on account of sins which are
committed, whether in consentings to it, when what is right is
overcome by that which pleases, or when by ignorance evil is accepted
as if it were good. And they are committed, whether by acting, or by
speaking, or--and this is the easiest and the quickest--by thinking.
From all which things what believer ever will boast that he has his
heart pure? or who will boast that he is pure from sin? [2591]
Certainly that which follows in the prayer is said on account of
concupiscence: "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from
evil." "For every one," as it is written, "is tempted when he is drawn
away of his own concupiscence, and enticed; then, when concupiscence
hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin." [2592]

Footnotes

[2590] Matt. vi. 12.
[2591] Prov. xx. 9.
[2592] Jas. i. 14.

Chapter 28 [XIV.]--Many Without Crime, None Without Sin.

All these products of concupiscence, and the old guilt of
concupiscence itself, are put away by the washing of baptism. And
whatever that concupiscence now brings forth, if they are not those
products which are called not only sins, but even crimes, are purified
by that method of daily prayer when we say, "Forgive us our debts, as
we forgive," and by the sincerity of alms-giving. For no one is so
foolish as to say that that precept of our Lord does not refer to
baptized people: "Forgive and it shall be forgiven you, give and it
shall be given you." [2593] But none could rightly be ordained a
minister in the Church if the apostle had said, "If any is without
sin," where he says, "If any is without crime;" [2594] or if he had
said, "Having no sin," where he says, "Having no crime." [2595]
Because many baptized believers are without crime, but I should say
that no one in this life is without sin,--however much the Pelagians
are inflated, and burst asunder in madness against me because I say
this: not because there remains anything of sin which is not remitted
in baptism; but because by us who remain in the weakness of this life
such sins do not cease daily to be committed, as are daily remitted to
those who pray in faith and work in mercy. This is the soundness of
the catholic faith, which the Holy Spirit everywhere sows,--not the
vanity and presumption of spirit of heretical pravity.

Footnotes

[2593] Luke vi. 37, 38.
[2594] Tit. i. 6.
[2595] 1 Tim. iii. 10.

Chapter 29 [XV.]--Julian Opposes the Faith of His Friends to the
Opinions of Catholic Believers. First of All, of Free Will.

Now therefore let us see, for the rest, in what way--after thinking
that he might calumniously object against me what I believe, and feign
what I do not believe--he himself professes his own faith or that of
the Pelagians. "In opposition to these things," he says, "we daily
argue, and we are unwilling to yield our consent to transgressors,
because we say that free will is in all by nature, and could not
perish by the sin of Adam; which assertion is confirmed by the
authority of all Scriptures." If in any degree it is necessary to say
this, you should not say it against the grace of God,--you should not
give your consent to transgressors, but you should correct your
opinion. But about this, as much as I could, and as far as it seemed
to be sufficient, I have argued above.

Chapter 30.--Secondly, of Marriage.

"We say," says he, "that that marriage which is now celebrated
throughout the earth was ordained by God, and that married people are
not guilty, but that fornicators and adulterers are to be condemned."
This is true and catholic doctrine; but what you want to gather from
this, to wit, that from the intercourse of male and female those who
are born derive no sin to be put away by the laver of
regeneration,--this is false and heretical.

Chapter 31.--Thirdly, of Conjugal Intercourse.

"We say," says he, "that the sexual impulse--that is, that the
virility itself, without which there can be no intercourse--is
ordained by God." To this I reply that the sexual impulse, and, to
make use of his word, virility, without which there can be no
intercourse, was so appointed by God that there was in it nothing to
be ashamed of. For it was not fit that His creature should blush at
the work of his Creator; but by a just punishment the disobedience of
the members was the retribution to the disobedience of the first man,
for which disobedience they blushed when they covered with fig-leaves
those shameful parts which previously were not shameful.

Chapter 32 [XVI.]--The Aprons Which Adam and Eve Wore.

For they did not use for themselves tunics to cover their whole bodies
after their sin, but aprons, [2596] which some of the less careful of
our translators have translated as "coverings." And this indeed is
true; but "covering" is a general name, by which may be understood
every kind of clothing and veil. And ambiguity ought to be avoided, so
that, as the Greek called them perizomata, by which only the shameful
parts of the body are covered, so also the Latin should either use the
Greek word itself, because now custom has come to use it instead of
the Latin, or, as some do, use the word aprons, [2597] or, as others
have better named them, wrestling aprons. [2598] Because this name is
taken from that ancient Roman custom whereby the youth covered their
shameful parts when they were exercised naked in the field; whence
even at this day they are called campestrati, [2599] since they cover
those members with the girdle. Although, if those members by which sin
was committed were to be covered after the sin, men ought not indeed
to have been clothed in tunics, but to have covered their hand and
mouth, because they sinned by taking and eating. What, then, is the
meaning, when the prohibited food was taken, and the transgression of
the precept had been committed, of the look turned towards those
members? What unknown novelty is felt there, and compels itself to be
noticed? And this is signified by the opening of the eyes. For their
eyes were not closed, either when Adam gave names to the cattle and
birds, or when Eve saw the trees to be beautiful and good; but they
were made open--that is, attentive--to consider; as it is written of
Agar, the handmaid of Sarah, that she opened her eyes and saw a well,
[2600] although she certainly had not had them closed before. As,
therefore, they were so suddenly ashamed of their nakedness, which
they were daily in the habit of looking upon and were not confused,
that they could now no longer bear those members naked, but
immediately took care to cover them; did not they--he in the open, she
in the hidden impulse--perceive those members to be disobedient to the
choice of their will, which certainly they ought to have ruled like
the rest by their voluntary command? And this they deservedly
suffered, because they themselves also were not obedient to their
Lord. Therefore they blushed that they in such wise had not manifested
service to their Creator, that they should deserve to lose dominion
over those members by which children were to be procreated.

Footnotes

[2596] Gen. iii. 7.
[2597] Succinctoria.
[2598] Campestria, which, as Augustin explains, is derived from
"campester," and that from "campus." See On the City of God, xiv. 17.
[2599] i.e. "campestre-clad."
[2600] Gen. xxi. 19.

Chapter 33.--The Shame of Nakedness.

This kind of shame--this necessity of blushing--is certainly born with
every man, and in some measure is commanded by the very laws of
nature; so that, in this matter, even virtuous married people are
ashamed. Nor can any one go to such an extreme of evil and disgrace,
as, because he knows God to be the author of nature and the ordainer
of marriage, to have intercourse even with his wife in any one's
sight, or not to blush at those impulses and seek secrecy, where he
can shun the sight not only of strangers, but even of all his own
relatives. Therefore let human nature be permitted to acknowledge the
evil that happens to it by its own fault, lest it should be compelled
either not to blush at its own impulses, which is most shameless, or
else to blush at the work of its Creator, which is most ungrateful. Of
this evil, nevertheless, virtuous marriage makes good use for the sake
of the benefit of the begetting of children. But to consent to lust
for the sake of carnal pleasure alone is sin, although it may be
conceded to married people with permission.

Chapter 34 [XVII.]--Whether There Could Be Sensual Appetite in
Paradise Before the Fall.

But, while maintaining, ye Pelagians, the honourableness and
fruitfulness of marriage, determine, if nobody had sinned, what you
would wish to consider the life of those people in Paradise, and
choose one of these four things. For beyond a doubt, either as often
as ever they pleased they would have had intercourse; or they would
bridle lust when intercourse was not necessary; or lust would arise at
the summons of will, just at the time when chaste prudence would have
perceived beforehand that intercourse was necessary; or, with no lust
existing at all, as every other member served for its own work, so for
its own work the organs of generation also would obey the commands of
those that willed, without any difficulty. Of these four suppositions,
choose which you please; but I think you will reject the two former,
in which lust is either obeyed or resisted. For the first one would
not be in accordance with so great a virtue, and the second not in
harmony with so great a happiness. For be the idea far from us, that
the glory of so great a blessedness as that should either be most
basely enslaved by always following a preceding lust, or, by resisting
it, should not enjoy the most abounding peace. Away, I say, with the
thought that that mind should either be gratified by consenting to
satisfy the concupiscence of the flesh, arising not opportunely for
the sake of procreation, but with unregulated excitement, or that that
quiet should find it necessary to restrain it by refusing.

Chapter 35.--Desire in Paradise Was Either None at All, or It Was
Obedient to the Impulse of the Will.

But whichever you choose of the two other alternatives, there is no
necessity for striving against you with any disputation. For even if
you should refuse to elect the fourth, in which there is the highest
tranquillity of all the obedient members without any lust, since
already the urgency of your arguments has made you hostile to it; that
will doubtless please you which I have put in the third place, that
that carnal concupiscence, whose impulse attains to the final pleasure
which much delights you, should never arise in Paradise except at the
bidding of the will when it would be necessary for procreation. If it
is agreeable to you to arrange this in Paradise, and if, by means of
such a concupiscence of the flesh which should neither anticipate, nor
impede, nor exceed the bidding of the will, it appears to you that
children could have been begotten, I have no objection. For, as far as
I am concerned in this matter, it is enough for me that such a
concupiscence of the flesh is not now among men, as you concede there
might have been in that place of happiness. For what it now is, the
sense of all men certainly confesses, although with modesty; because
it both solicits with excessive and importunate uneasiness the chaste,
even when they are unwilling and are checking it by moderation, and
frequently withdraws itself from the willing and inflicts itself on
the unwilling; so that, by its disobedience, it testifies that it is
nothing else than the punishment of that first disobedience. Whence,
reasonably, both then the first men when they covered their nakedness,
and now whoever considers himself to be a man, every no less modest
than immodest person is confounded at it--far be it from us to say by
the work of God, but--by the penalty of the first and ancient sin.
You, however, not for the sake of religious reasoning, but for excited
contention,--not on behalf of human modesty, but for your own madness,
that even the concupiscence of the flesh itself should not be thought
to be currupted, and original sin to be derived from it,--are
endeavouring by your argument to recall it absolutely, such as it now
is, into Paradise; and to contend that that concupiscence could have
been there which would either always be followed by a disgraceful
consent, or would sometimes be restrained by a pitiable refusal. I,
however, do not greatly care what it delights you to think of it.
Still, whatever of men is born by its means, if he is not born again,
without doubt he is damned; and he must be under the dominion of the
devil, if he is not delivered thence by Christ.

Chapter 36 [XVIII.]--Julian's Fourth Objection, that Man is God's
Work, and is Not Constrained to Evil or Good by His Power.

"We maintain," says he, "that men are the work of God, and that no one
is forced unwillingly by His power either into evil or good, but that
man does either good or ill of his own will; but that in a good work
he is always assisted by God's grace, while in evil he is incited by
the suggestions of the devil." To this I answer, that men, in so far
as they are men, are the work of God; but in so far as they are
sinners, they are under the devil, unless they are plucked from thence
by Him who became the Mediator between God and man, for no other
reason than because He could not be a sinner from men. And that no one
is forced by God's power unwillingly either into evil or good, but
that when God forsakes a man, he deservedly goes to evil, and that
when God assists, without deserving he is converted to good. For a man
is not good if he is unwilling, but by the grace of God he is even
assisted to the point of being willing; because it is not vainly
written, "For it is God that worketh in you, both to will and to do
for His good pleasure," [2601] and, "The will is prepared by God."
[2602]

Footnotes

[2601] Phil. ii. 13.
[2602] Prov. viii. 35.

Chapter 37 [XIX.]--The Beginning of a Good Will is the Gift of Grace.

But you think that a man is so aided by the grace of God in a good
work, that in stirring up his will to that very good work you believe
that grace does nothing; for this your own words sufficiently declare.
For why have you not said that a man is incited by God's grace to a
good work, as you have said that he is incited to evil by the
suggestions of the devil, but have said that in a good work he is
always aided by God's grace?--as if by his own will, and without any
grace of God, he undertook a good work, and were then divinely
assisted in the work itself, for the sake, that is to say, of the
merits of his good will; so that grace is rendered as due,--not given
as not due,--and thus grace is made no more grace. [2603] But this is
what, in the Palestinian judgment, Pelagius with a deceitful heart
condemned,--that the grace of God, namely, is given according to our
merits. Tell me, I beseech you, what good, Paul, while he was as yet
Saul, willed, and not rather great evils, when breathing out slaughter
he went, in horrible darkness of mind and madness, to lay waste the
Christians? [2604] For what merits of a good will did God convert him
by a marvellous and sudden calling from those evils to good things?
What shall I say, when he himself cries, "Not by works of
righteousness that we have done, but according to His mercy He saved
us"? [2605] What is that which I have already mentioned [2606] as
having been said by the Lord, "No one can come to me,"--which is
understood as "believe on me,"--unless it were given him of my
Father"? [2607] Whether is this given to him who is already willing to
believe, for the sake of the merits of a good will? or rather is the
will itself, as in the case of Saul, stirred up from above, that he
may believe, even although he is so averse from the faith as even to
persecute the believers? For how has the Lord commanded us to pray for
those who persecute us? Do we pray thus that the grace of God may be
recompensed them for the sake of their good will, and not rather that
the evil will itself may be changed into a good one? Just as we
believe that at that time the saints whom he was persecuting did not
pray for Saul in vain, that his will might be converted to the faith
which he was destroying. And indeed that his conversion was effected
from above, appeared even by a manifest miracle. But how many enemies
of Christ are at the present day suddenly drawn by God's secret grace
to Christ! And if I had not set down this word from the gospel, what
things would that man have said in this behalf concerning me, since
even now he is stirring, not against me, but against Him who cries,
"No man can come to me, except the Father who hath sent me draw him"!
[2608] For He does not say, "except He lead him," so that we can thus
in any way understand that his will precedes. For who is "drawn," if
he was already willing? And yet no man comes unless he is willing.
Therefore he is drawn in wondrous ways to will, by Him who knows how
to work within the very hearts of men. Not that men who are unwilling
should believe, which cannot be, but that they should be made willing
from being unwilling.

Footnotes

Chapter 38 [XX.]--The Power of God's Grace is Proved.

That this is true we do not surmise by human conjecture, but we
discern by the most evident authority of the divine Scriptures. It is
read in the books of the Chronicles: "Also in Judah, the hand of God
was made to give them one heart, to do the commandment of the king and
of the princes in the word of the Lord." [2609] Also by Ezekiel the
prophet the Lord says, "I will give them another heart, and a new
spirit will I give them; and I will take away their stony heart out of
their flesh, and I will give them an heart of flesh, that they may
walk in my commandments and observe my judgments and do them." [2610]
And what is that which Esther the queen prays when she says, "Give me
eloquent speech in my mouth, and enlighten my words in the sight of
the lion, and turn his heart to hatred of him that fighteth against
us"? [2611] How does she say such things as these in her prayer to
God, if God does not work His will in men's hearts? But perchance the
woman was foolish in praying thus. Let us see, then, whether the
desire of the petitioner was vainly sent on in advance, and whether
the result did not follow as of one who heard. Lo, she goes in to the
king. We need not say much. And because she did not approach him in
her own order, under the compulsion of her great necessity, "he looked
upon her," as it is written, "like a bull in the impulse of his
indignation. And the queen feared, and her colour was changed through
faintness, and she bowed herself upon the head of her maid, who went
before her. And God changed him, and converted his indignation into
mildness." [2612] Now what need is there to relate what follows, where
the divine Scripture testifies that God fulfilled what she had asked
for by working in the heart of the king nothing other than the will by
which he commanded, and it was done as the queen had asked of him? And
now God had heard her that it should be done, who changed the heart of
the king by a most secret and efficacious power before he had heard
the address of the woman beseeching him, and moulded it from
indignation to mildness,--that is, from the will to hurt, to the will
to favour,--according to that word of the apostle, "God worketh in you
to will also." Did the men of God who wrote these things--nay, did the
Spirit of God Himself, under whose guidance such things were written
by them--assail the free will of man? Away with the notion! But He has
commended both the most righteous judgment and the most merciful aid
of the Omnipotent in all cases. For it is enough for man to know that
there is no unrighteousness with God. But how He dispenses those
benefits, making some deservedly vessels of wrath, others graciously
vessels of mercy,--who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been
His counsellor? If, then, we attain to the honour of grace, let us not
be ungrateful by attributing to ourselves what we have received. "For
what have we which we have not received?" [2613]

Footnotes

Chapter 39 [XXI.]--Julian's Fifth Objection Concerning the Saints of
the Old Testament.

"We say," says he, "that the saints of the Old Testament, their
righteousness being perfected here, passed to eternal life,--that is,
that by the love of virtue they departed from all sins; because those
whom we read of as having committed any sin, we nevertheless know to
have amended themselves." Of whatever virtue you may declare that the
ancient righteous men were possessed, nothing saved them but the
belief in the Mediator who shed His blood for the remission of their
sins. For their own word is, "I believed, and therefore I spoke."
[2614] Whence the Apostle Paul also says, "And we having the same
Spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore
have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak." [2615] What is
"the same Spirit," but that Spirit whom these righteous men also had
who said such things? The Apostle Peter also says, "Why do ye wish to
put a yoke upon the heathen, which neither we nor our fathers have
been able to bear? But, by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we
believe that we shall be saved, even as they." [2616] You who are
enemies to this grace do not wish this, that the ancients should be
believed to have been saved by the same grace of Jesus Christ; but you
distribute the times according to Pelagius, [2617] in whose books this
is read, and you say that before the law men were saved by nature,
then by the law, lastly by Christ, as if to men of the two former
times, that is to say, before the law and under the law, the blood of
Christ had not been necessary; making void what is said: "For there is
one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
[2618]

Footnotes

Chapter 40 [XXII.]--The Sixth Objection, Concerning the Necessity of
Grace for All, and Concerning the Baptism of Infants.

They say, "We confess that the grace of Christ is necessary to all,
both to grown-up people and to infants; and we anathematize those who
say that a child born of two baptized people ought not to be
baptized." I know in what sense you say such things as these--not
according to the Apostle Paul, but according to the heretic
Pelagius;--to wit, that baptism is necessary for infants, not for the
sake of the remission of sins, but only for the sake of the kingdom of
heaven; for you give them outside the kingdom of heaven a place of
salvation and life eternal, even if they have not been baptized. Nor
do you regard what is written, "Whosoever believeth and is baptized
shall be saved; but he who believeth not shall be condemned." [2619]
For which reason, in the Church of the Saviour, infants believe by
means of other people, even as they have derived those sins which are
remitted them in baptism from other people. Nor do you think thus,
that they cannot have life who have been without the body and blood of
Christ, although He said Himself, "Unless ye eat my flesh and drink my
blood, ye shall have no life in you." [2620] Or if you are forced by
the words of the gospel to confess that infants departing from the
body cannot have either life or salvation unless they have been
baptized, ask why those who are not baptized are compelled to undergo
the judgment of the second death, by the judgment of Him who condemns
nobody undeservingly, and you will find what you do not
want,--original sin!

Footnotes

[2619] Mark xvi. 16.
[2620] John vi. 34.

Chapter 41 [XXIII.]--The Seventh Objection, of the Effect of Baptism.

"We condemn," says he, "those who affirm that baptism does not do away
all sins, because we know that full cleansing is conferred by these
mysteries." We also say this; but you do not say that infants are also
by those same mysteries freed from the bonds of their first birth and
of their hateful descent. On which account it behoves you, like other
heretics also, to be separated from the Church of Christ, which holds
this of old time.

Chapter 42 [XXIV.]--He Rebuts the Conclusion of Julian's Letter.

But now the manner in which he concludes the letter by saying, "Let no
one therefore seduce you, nor let the wicked deny that they think
these things. But if they speak the truth, either let a hearing be
given, or let those very bishops who now disagree with me condemn what
I have above said that they hold with the Manicheans, as we condemn
those things which they declare concerning us, and a full agreement
shall be made; but if they will not, know ye that they are Manicheans,
and abstain from their company;"--this is rather to be despised than
rebuked. For which of us hesitates to pronounce an anathema against
the Manicheans, who say that from the good God neither proceed men,
nor was ordained marriage, nor was given the law, which was ministered
to the Hebrew people by Moses! But against the Pelagians also, not
without reason, we pronounce an anathema, for that they are so hostile
to God's grace, which comes through Jesus Christ our Lord, as to say
that it is given not freely, but according to our merits, and thus
grace is no more grace; [2621] and place so much in free will by which
man is plunged into the abyss, as to say that by making good use of it
man deserves grace,--although no man can make good use of it except by
grace, which is not repaid according to debt, but is given freely by
God's mercy. And they so contend that infants are already saved, that
they dare deny that they are to be saved by the Saviour. And holding
and disseminating these execrable dogmas, they still over and above
constantly demand a hearing, when, as condemned, they ought to repent.

Footnotes

[2621] Rom. xi. 6.

Footnotes

[2526] [When Augustin's friend Alypius brought to Africa the extracts
from Julian's reply to Augustin's first book On Marriage and
Concupiscence, which were sent by Count Valerius, and which occasioned
the writing of his second book on the same subject (see above, pp. 259
and 281), he also brought two letters sent by Pope Boniface; the one
ascribed to Julian, and the other to eighteen bishops including
Julian, which attacked the catholic faith, and Augustin personally. It
was in answer to these that this treatise was written.--W.]
.

Book II.

He undertakes to examine the second letter of the Pelagians, filled,
like the first, with calumnies against the Catholics--a letter that
was sent by them to Thessalonica in the name of eighteen bishops; and,
first of all, he shows, by the comparison of the heretical writings
with one another, that the Catholics are by no means falling into the
errors of the Manicheans in detesting the dogmas of the Pelagians. He
repels the calumny of prevarication incurred by the Roman clergy in
the latter condemnation of Pelagius and Coelestius by Zosimus, showing
that the Pelagian dogmas were never approved at Rome, although for
some time, by the clemency of Zosimus, Coelestius was mercifully dealt
with, with a view to leading him to the correction of his errors. He
shows that, under the name of grace, Catholics neither assert a
doctrine of fate, nor attribute respect of persons to God; although
they truly say that God's grace is not given according to human
merits, and that the first desire of good is inspired by God; so that
a man does not at all make a beginning of a change from bad to good,
unless the unbought and gratuitous mercy of God effects that beginning
in him.

Let me now consider a second letter, not of Julian's alone, but common
to him with several bishops, which they sent to Thessalonica; and let
me answer it, with God's help, as I best can. And lest this work of
mine become longer than the necessity of the subject itself requires,
what need is there to refute those things which do not contain the
insidious poison of their doctrine, but seem only to plead for the
acquiescence of the Eastern bishops for their assistance, or, on
behalf of the catholic faith, against the profanity, as they say, of
the Manicheans; with no other view except, a horrible heresy being
presented to them, whose adversaries they profess themselves to be, to
lie hid as the enemies of grace in praise of nature? For who at any
time has stirred any question of these matters against them? or what
catholic is displeased because they condemn those whom the apostle
foretold as departing from the faith, having their conscience seared,
forbidding to marry, abstaining from meats that they think unclean,
not thinking that all things were created by God? [2622] Who at any
time constrained them to deny that every creature of God is good, and
there is no substance which the supreme God has not made, except God
Himself, who was not made by any? It is not such things as these,
which it is plain are catholic truths, that are rebuked and condemned
in them; because not alone the catholic faith holds in detestation the
Manichean impiety as exceedingly foolish and mischievous, but also all
heretics who are not Manicheans. Whence even these Pelagians do well
to utter an anathema against the Manicheans, and to speak against
their errors. But they do two evil things, for which they themselves
must also be anathematized--one, that they impeach catholics under the
name of Manicheans, the other, that they themselves also are
introducing the heresy of a new error. For they are not therefore
sound in the faith because they are not labouring under the disease of
the Manicheans. The kind of pestilence is not always one and the
same--as in the bodies, so also in the minds. As, therefore, the
physician of the body would not have pronounced a man free from peril
of death whom he might have declared free from dropsy, if he had seen
him to be sick of some other mortal disease; so truth is not
acknowledged in their case because they are not Manicheans, if they
are raving in some other kind of perversity. Wherefore what we
anathematize with them is one thing, what we anathematize in them is
another. For we hold in abhorrence with them what is rightly offensive
to them also; just as, nevertheless, we hold in abhorrence in them
that for which they themselves are rightly offensive.

Footnotes

[2622] 1 Tim. iv. ff.

Chapter 2 [II.]--The Heresies of the Manicheans and Pelagians are
Mutually Opposed, and are Alike Reprobated by the Catholic Church.

The Manicheans say that the good God is not the Creator of all
natures; the Pelagians that God is not the Purifier, the Saviour, the
Deliverer of all ages among men. The catholic Church condemns both; as
well maintaining God's creation against the Manicheans, that no nature
may be denied to be framed by Him, as maintaining against the
Pelagians that in all ages human nature must be sought after as
ruined. The Manicheans rebuke the concupiscence of the flesh, not as
if it were an accidental vice, but as if it were a nature bad from
eternity; the Pelagians approve it as if it were no vice, but even a
natural good. The catholic faith condemns both, saying to the
Manicheans, "It is not nature, but it is vice;" saying to the
Pelagians, "It is not of the Father, but it is of the world;" in order
that both may allow it as an evil sickness to be cured--the former by
ceasing to believe it, as it were, incurable, the latter by ceasing to
proclaim it as laudable. The Manicheans deny that to a good man the
beginning of evil came from free will; the Pelagians say that even a
bad man has free will sufficiently to perform the good commandment.
The catholic Church condemns both, saying to the former, "God made man
upright," [2623] and saying to the latter, "If the Son shall make you
free, ye shall be free indeed." [2624] The Manicheans say that the
soul, as a particle of God, has sin by the commixture of an evil
nature; the Pelagians say that the soul is upright, not indeed a
particle, but a creature of God, and has not even in this corruptible
life any sin. The catholic Church condemns both, saying to the
Manicheans, "Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the
tree evil and its fruit evil," [2625] which would not be said to man
who cannot make his own nature, unless because sin is not nature, but
vice; and saying to the Pelagians, "If we say that we have no sin we
deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." [2626] In these
diseases, opposed as they are to one another, the Manicheans and the
Pelagians are at issue, with dissimilar will but with similar vanity,
separated by different opinions, but close together by a perverse
mind.

Footnotes

Chapter 3.--How Far the Manicheans and Pelagians are Joined in Error;
How Far They are Separated.

Still, indeed, they alike oppose the grace of Christ, they alike make
His baptism of no account, they alike dishonour His flesh; but,
moreover, they do these things in different ways and for different
reasons. For the Manicheans assert that divine assistance is given to
the merits of a good nature, but the Pelagians, to the merits of a
good will. The former say, God owes this to the labours of His
members; the latter say, God owes this to the virtues of His servants.
In both cases, therefore, the reward is not imputed according to
grace, but according to debt. The Manicheans contend, with a profane
heart, that the washing of regeneration--that is, the water itself--is
superfluous, and is of no advantage. But the Pelagians assert that
what is said in holy baptism for the putting away of sins is of no
avail to infants, as they have no sin; and thus in the baptism of
infants, as far as pertains to the remission of sins, the Manicheans
destroy the visible element, but the Pelagians destroy even the
invisible sacrament. The Manicheans dishonour Christ's flesh by
blaspheming the birth from the Virgin; but the Pelagians by making the
flesh of those to be redeemed equal to the flesh of the Redeemer.
Since Christ was born, not of course in sinful flesh, but in the
likeness of sinful flesh, while the flesh of the rest of mankind is
born sinful. The Manicheans, therefore, who absolutely abominate all
flesh, take away the manifest truth from the flesh of Christ; but the
Pelagians, who maintain that no flesh is born sinful, take away from
Christ's flesh its special and proper dignity.

Chapter 4.--The Two Contrary Errors.

Let the Pelagians, then, cease to object to the catholics that which
they are not, but let them rather hasten to amend what they themselves
are; and let them not wish to be considered deserving of approval
because they are opposed to the hateful error of the Manicheans, but
let them acknowledge themselves to be deservedly hateful because they
do not put away their own error. For two errors may be opposed to one
another, although both are to be reprobated because both are alike
opposed to the truth. For if the Pelagians are to be loved because
they hate the Manicheans, the Manicheans should also be loved because
they hate the Pelagians. But be it far from our catholic mother to
choose some to love on the ground that they hate others, when by the
warning and help of the Lord she ought to avoid both, and should
desire to heal both.

Chapter 5 [III.]--The Calumny of the Pelagians Against the Clergy of
the Roman Church.

Moreover, they accuse the Roman clergy, writing, "That, driven by the
fear of a command, they have not blushed to be guilty of the crime of
prevarication; so that, contrary to their previous judgment, wherein
by their proceedings they had assented to the catholic dogma, they
subsequently pronounced that the nature of men is evil." Nay, but the
Pelagians had conceived, with a false hope, that the new and execrable
dogma of Pelagius or Coelestius could be made acceptable to the
catholic intelligences of certain Romans, when those crafty
spirits--however perverted by a wicked error, yet not contemptible,
since they appeared rather to be deserving of considerate correction
than of easy condemnation--were treated with somewhat more of lenity
than the stricter discipline of the Church required. For while so many
and such important ecclesiastical documents were passing and repassing
between the Apostolical See and the African bishops, [2627]
--and,moreover, when the proceedings in this matter in that see were
completed, with Coelestius present and making answer,--what sort of a
letter, what decree, is found of Pope Zosimus, of venerable memory,
wherein he prescribed that it must be believed that man is born
without any taint of original sin? Absolutely he never said
this--never wrote it at all. But since Coelestius had written this in
his pamphlet, among those matters, merely, on which he confessed that
he was still in doubt and desired to be instructed, the desire of
amendment in a man of so acute an intellect, who, if he could be put
right, would assuredly be of advantage to many, and not the falsehood
of the doctrine, was approved. And therefore his pamphlet was called
catholic, because this also is the part of a catholic disposition,--if
by chance in any matters a man thinks differently from what the truth
demands, not with the greatest accuracy to define those matters, but,
if detected and demonstrated, to reject them. For it was not to
heretics, but to catholics, that the apostle was speaking when he
said, "Let us, therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded; and
if in anything ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto
you." [2628] This was thought to have been the case in him when he
replied that he consented to the letters of Pope Innocent of blessed
memory, in which all doubt about this matter was removed. And in order
that this might be made fuller and more manifest in him, matters were
delayed until letters should come from Africa, in which province his
craftiness had in some sort become more evidently known. And
afterwards these letters came to Rome containing this, that it was not
sufficient for men of more sluggish and anxious minds that he
confessed his general consent to the letters of Bishop Innocent, but
that he ought openly to anathematize the mischievous statements which
he had made in his pamphlet; lest if he did not do so, many people of
better intelligence should rather believe that in his pamphlet those
poisons of the faith had been approved by the catholic see, because it
had been affirmed by that see that that pamphlet was catholic, than
that they had been amended because of his answer that he consented to
the letters of Pope Innocent. Then, therefore, when his presence was
demanded, in order that by certain and clear answers either the craft
of the man or his correction might plainly appear and remain doubtful
to no one, he withdrew himself and refused the examination. Neither
would the delay which had already been made for the advantage of
others have taken place, if it could not be of advantage to the
pertinacity and madness of those who were excessively perverse. But
if, which be far from the case, it had so been judged in the Roman
Church concerning Coelestius or Pelagius, that those dogmas of theirs,
which in themselves and with themselves Pope Innocent had condemned,
should be pronounced worthy of approval and maintenance, the mark of
prevarication would rather have to be branded on the Roman clergy for
this. But now, when the first letters of the most blessed Pope
Innocent, in reply to the letters of the African bishops, [2629] would
have equally condemned this error which these men are endeavouring to
commend to us; and his successor, the holy Pope Zosimus, would never
have said, never have written, that this dogma which these men think
concerning infants is to be held; nay, would even have bound
Coelestius by a repeated sentence, when he endeavoured to clear
himself, to a consent to the above-mentioned letters of the Apostolic
See;--assuredly, whatever in the meanwhile was done more leniently
concerning Coelestius, provided the stability of the most ancient and
robust faith were maintained, was the most merciful persuasion of
correction, not the most pernicious approval of wickedness; and that
afterwards, by the same priesthood, Coelestius and Pelagius were
condemned by repeated authority, was the proof of a severity, for a
little while intermitted, at length of necessity to be carried out,
not a denial of a previously-known truth or a new acknowledgment of
truth.

Footnotes

Chapter 6 [IV.]--What Was Done in the Case of Coelestius and Zosimus.

But what need is there for us to delay longer in speaking of this
matter, when there are extant here and there proceedings and writings
drawn up, where all those things just as they were transacted may be
either learnt or recalled? For who does not see in what degree
Coelestius was bound by the interrogations of your holy predecessor
and by the answers of Coelestius, whereby he professed that he
consented to the letters of Pope Innocent, and fastened by a most
wholesome chain, so as not to dare any further to maintain that the
original sin of infants is not put away in baptism? Because these are
the words of the venerable Bishop Innocent concerning this matter to
the Carthaginian Council: "For once," he said, "he bore free will;
but, using his advantage inconsiderately, and falling into the depths
of apostasy, he was overwhelmed, and found no way whereby he could
rise from thence; and, deceived for ever by his liberty, he would have
lain under the oppression of this ruin, if the advent of Christ had
not subsequently for his grace delivered him, and, by the purification
of a new regeneration, purged all past sin by the washing of His
baptism." [2630] What could be more clear or more manifest than that
judgment of the Apostolical See? To this Coelestius professed that he
assented, when it was said to him by your holy predecessor, "Do you
condemn all those things that are bandied about under your name?" and
he himself replied, "I condemn them in accordance with the judgment of
your predecessor Innocent, of blessed memory." But among other things
which had been uttered under his name, the deacon Paulinus had
objected to Coelestius that he said "that the sin of Adam was
prejudicial to himself alone, and not to the human race, and that
infants newly born were in the same condition in which Adam was before
his sin." [2631] Accordingly, if he would condemn the views objected
to by Paulinus with a truthful heart and tongue, according to the
judgment of the blessed Pope Innocent, what could remain to him
afterwards whence he could contend that there was no sin in infants
resulting from the past transgression of the first man, which would be
purged in holy baptism by the purification of the new regeneration?
But he showed that he had answered deceitfully by the final event,
when he withdrew himself from the examination, lest he should be
compelled, according to the African rescripts, absolutely to mention
and anathematize the very words themselves concerning this question
which he wrote in his tractate.

Footnotes

[2630] Augustin's Letters, 181, 7.
[2631] See On Original Sin, 3.

Chapter 7.--He Suggests a Dilemma to Coelestius.

What was that which the same pope replied to the bishops of Numidia
concerning this very cause, because he had received letters from both
Councils, as well from the Council of Carthage as from the Council of
Mileve--does he not speak most plainly concerning infants? For these
are his words: [2632] "For what your Fraternity [2633] asserts that
they preach, that infants can be endowed with the rewards of eternal
life even without the grace of baptism, is excessively silly; for
unless they shall eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His
blood, they shall not have life in themselves. [2634] And they who
maintain this as being theirs without regeneration, appear to me to
wish to destroy baptism itself, since they proclaim that these have
that which we believe is not to be conferred on them without baptism."
What does the ungrateful man say to this, when the Apostolic See had
already spared him on his profession, as if he were corrected by its
most benignant lenity? What does he say to this? Will infants after
the end of their life, even if while they live they are not baptized
in Christ, be in eternal life, or will they not? If he should say,
"They will," how then did he answer that he had condemned what had
been uttered under his name "according to the judgment of Innocent, of
blessed memory"? Lo, Pope Innocent, of blessed memory, says that
infants have not life without Christ's baptism, and without partaking
of Christ's body and blood. If he should say, "They will not," how
then, if they do not receive eternal life, are they certainly by
consequence condemned in eternal death if they derive no original sin?

Footnotes

Chapter 8.--The Catholic Faith Concerning Infants.

What do they say to these things who dare also to write their
mischievous impieties, and dare to send them to the Eastern bishops?
Coelestius is held to have given consent to the letters of the
venerable Innocent; the letters themselves of the prelate mentioned
are read, and he writes that infants who are not baptized cannot have
life. And who will deny that, as a consequence, they have death, if
they have not life? Whence, then, in infants, is so wretched a penalty
as that, if there is no original fault? How, then, are the Roman
clergy charged with prevarication by those forsakers of the faith and
opponents of grace under Bishop Zosimus, as if they had had any other
view in the subsequent condemnation of Coelestius and Pelagius than
that which they had in a former one under Innocent? Because,
certainly, since by the letters of the venerable Innocent concerning
the abode of infants in eternal death unless they were baptized in
Christ, the antiquity of the catholic faith shone forth, assuredly he
would rather be a prevaricator from the Roman Church who should
deviate from that judgment; and since with God's blessing this did not
happen, but that judgment itself was constantly maintained in the
repeated condemnation of Coelestius and Pelagius, let them understand
that they themselves are in the position wherein they accuse others of
being, and let them hereafter be healed of their prevarication from
the faith. Because the catholic faith does not say that the nature of
man is bad in as far as he was made man at first by the Creator; nor
now is what God creates in that nature when He makes men from men, his
evil; but what he derives from that sin of the first man.

Chapter 9 [V.]--He Replies to the Calumnies of the Pelagians.

And now we must look to those things which they objected to us in
their letters, and briefly mentioned. And to these this is my answer.
We do not say that by the sin of Adam free will perished out of the
nature of men; but that it avails for sinning in men subjected to the
devil; while it is not of avail for good and pious living, unless the
will itself of man should be made free by God's grace, and assisted to
every good movement of action, of speech, of thought. We say that no
one but the Lord God is the maker of those who are born, and that
marriage was ordained not by the devil, but by God Himself; yet that
all are born under sin on account of the fault of propagation, and
that, therefore, all are under the devil until they are born again in
Christ. Nor are we maintaining fate under the name of grace, because
we say that the grace of God is preceded by no merits of man. If,
however, it is agreeable to any to call the will of the Almighty God
by the name of fate, while we indeed shun profane novelties of words,
we have no use for contending about words.

Chapter 10.--Why the Pelagians Falsely Accuse Catholics of Maintaining
Fate Under the Name of Grace.

But, as I was somewhat more attentively considering for what reason
they should think it well to object this to us, that we assert fate
under the name of grace, I first of all looked into those words of
theirs which follow. For thus they have thought that this was to be
objected to us: "Under the name," say they, "of grace, they so assert
fate as to say that unless God inspired unwilling and resisting man
with the desire of good, and that good imperfect, he would neither be
able to decline from evil nor to lay hold of good." Then a little
after, where they mention what they maintain, I gave heed to what was
said by them about this matter. "We confess," say they, that baptism
is necessary for all ages, and that grace, moreover, assists the good
purpose of everybody; but yet that it does not infuse the love of
virtue into a reluctant one, because there is no acceptance of persons
with God." [2635] From these words of theirs, I perceived that for
this reason they either think, or wish it to be thought, that we
assert fate under the name of grace, because we say that God's grace
is not given in respect of our merits, but according to His own most
merciful will, in that He said, "I will be gracious to whom I will be
gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy." [2636]
Where, by way of consequence, it is added, "Therefore it is not of him
that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy."
[2637] Here any one might be equally foolish in thinking or saying
that the apostle is an assertor of fate. But here these people
sufficiently lay themselves open; for when they malign us by saying
that we maintain fate under the name of grace, because we say that
God's grace is not given on account of our merits, beyond a doubt they
confess that they themselves say that it is given on account of our
merits; thus their blindness could not conceal and dissimulate that
they believe and think thus, although, when this view was objected to
him, Pelagius, in the episcopal judgment of Palestine, with crafty
fear condemned it. For it was objected to him from the words of his
own disciple Coelestius, indeed, that he himself also was in the habit
of saying that God's grace is given on account of our merits. And he
in abhorrence, or in pretended abhorrence, of this, did not delay,
with his lips at least, to anathematize it; [2638] but, as his later
writings indicate, and the assertion of those followers of his makes
evident, he kept it in his deceitful heart, until afterwards his
boldness might put forth in letters [2639] what the cunning of a
denier had then hidden for fear. And still the Pelagian bishops do not
dread, and at least are not ashamed, to send their letters to the
catholic Eastern bishops, in which they charge us with being assertors
of fate because we do not say that even grace is given according to
our merits; although Pelagius, fearing the Eastern bishops, did not
dare to say this, and so was compelled to condemn it.

Footnotes

Chapter 11 [VI.]--The Accusation of Fate is Thrown Back Upon the
Adversaries.

But is it true, O children of pride, enemies of God's grace, new
Pelagian heretics, that whoever says that all man's good deservings
are preceded by God's grace, and that God's grace is not given to
merits, lest it should not be grace if it is not given freely but be
repaid as due to those who deserve it, seems to you to assert fate? Do
not you yourselves also say, whatever be your purpose, that baptism is
necessary for all ages? Have you not written in this very letter of
yours that opinion concerning baptism, and that concerning grace, side
by side? Why did not baptism, which is given to infants, by that very
juxtaposition admonish you what you ought to think concerning grace?
For these are your words: "We confess that baptism is necessary for
all ages, and that grace, moreover, assists the good purpose of
everybody; but yet that it does not infuse the love of virtue into a
reluctant one, because there is no acceptance of persons with God." In
all these words of yours, I for the meanwhile say nothing of what you
have said concerning grace. But give a reason concerning baptism, why
you should say that it is necessary for all ages; say why it is
necessary for infants. Assuredly because it confers some good upon
them; and that same something is neither small nor moderate, but of
great account. For although you deny that they contract the original
sin which is remitted in baptism, yet you do not deny that in that
laver of regeneration they are adopted from the sons of men unto the
sons of God; nay, you even preach this. Tell us, then, how the
infants, whoever they are, that are baptized in Christ and have
departed from the body, received so lofty a gift as this, and with
what preceding merits. If you should say that they have deserved this
by the piety of their parents, it will be replied to you, Why is this
benefit sometimes denied to the children of pious people and given to
the children of the wicked? For sometimes the offspring born from
religious people, in tender age, and thus fresh from the womb, is
forestalled by death before it can be washed in the laver of
regeneration, and the infant born of Christ's foes is baptized in
Christ by the mercy of Christians,--the baptized mother bewails her
own little one not baptized, and the chaste virgin gathers in to be
baptized a foreign offspring, exposed by an unchaste mother. Here,
certainly, the merits of parents are wanting, and even by your own
confession the merits of the infants themselves are wanting also. For
we know that you do not believe this of the human soul, that it has
lived somewhere before it inhabited this earthly body, and has done
something either of good or of evil for which it might deserve such
difference in the flesh. What cause, then, has procured baptism for
this infant, and has denied it to that? Do they have fate because they
do not have merit? or is there in these things acceptance of persons
with God? For you have said both,--first fate, afterwards acceptance
of persons,--that, since both must be refuted, there may remain the
merit which you wish to introduce against grace. Answer, then,
concerning the merits of infants, why some should depart from their
bodies baptized, others not baptized, and by the merits of their
parents neither possess nor fail of so excellent a gift that they
should become sons of God from sons of men, by no deserving of their
parents, by no deservings of their own. You are silent, forsooth, and
you find yourselves rather in the same position which you object to
us. For if when there is no merit you say that consequently there is
fate, and on this account wish the merit of man to be understood in
the grace of God, lest you should be compelled to confess fate; see,
you rather assert a fate in the baptism of infants, since you avow
that in them there is no merit. But if, in the case of infants to be
baptized, you deny that any merit at all precedes, and yet do not
concede that there is a fate, why do you cry out,--when we say that
the grace of God is therefore given freely, lest it should not be
grace, and is not repaid as if it were due to preceding merits,--that
we are assertors of fate?--not perceiving that in the justification of
the wicked, as there are no merits because it is God's grace, so that
it is not fate because it is God's grace, and so that it is not
acceptance of persons because it is God's grace.

Chapter 12.--What is Meant Under the Name of Fate.

Because they who affirm fate contend that not only actions and events,
but, moreover, our very wills themselves depend on the position of the
stars at the time in which one is conceived or born; which positions
they call "constellations." But the grace of God stands above not only
all stars and all heavens, but, moreover, all angels. In a word, the
assertors of fate attribute both men's good and evil doings and
fortunes to fate; but God in the ill fortunes of men follows up their
merits with due retribution, while good fortunes He bestows by
undeserved grace with a merciful will; doing both the one and the
other not according to a temporal conjunction of stars, but according
to the eternal and high counsel of His severity and goodness. We see,
then, that neither belongs to fate. Here, if you answer that this very
benevolence of God, by which He follows not merits, but bestows
undeserved benefits with gratuitous bounty, should rather be called
"fate," when the apostle calls this "grace," saying, "By grace are ye
saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, but it is the gift of
God; not of works, lest perchance any one should be lifted up," [2640]
--do you not consider, do you not perceive that it is not by us that
fate is asserted under the name of grace, but it is rather by you that
divine grace is called by the name of fate?

Footnotes

And, moreover, we rightly call it "acceptance of persons" where he who
judges, neglecting the merit of the cause concerning which he is
judging, favours the one against the other, because he finds something
in his person which is worthy of honour or of pity. But if any one
have two debtors, and he choose to remit the debt to the one, to
require it of the other, he gives to whom he will and defrauds nobody;
nor is this to be called "acceptance of persons," since there is no
injustice. The acceptance of persons may seem otherwise to those who
are of small understanding, where the lord of the vineyard gave to
those labourers who had done work therein for one hour as much as to
those who had borne the burden and heat of the day, making them equal
in wages in the labour of whom there had been such a difference. But
what did he reply to those who murmured against the goodman of the
house concerning this, as it were, acceptance of persons? "Friend,"
said he, "I do thee no wrong. Hast not thou agreed with me for a
denarius? Take what thine is, and go; but I choose to give to this
last as to thee. Is it not lawful to me to do what I will? Is thine
eye evil because I am good?" [2641] Here, forsooth, is the entire
justice: "I choose this. To thee," he says, "I have repaid; on him I
have bestowed; nor have I taken anything away from thee to bestow it
on him; nor have I either diminished or denied what I owed to you."
"May I not do what I will? Is thine eye evil because I am good?" As,
therefore, here there is no acceptance of persons, because one is
honoured freely in such wise as that another is not defrauded of what
is due to him: so also when, according to the purpose of God, one is
called, another is not called, a gratuitous benefit is bestowed on the
one that is called, of which benefit the calling itself is the
beginning,--an evil is repaid to him that is not called, because all
are guilty, from the fact that by one man sin entered into the world.
And in that parable of the labourers, indeed, where they received one
denarius who laboured for one hour, as well as those who laboured
twelve times as long,--though assuredly these latter, according to
human reasonings, however vain, ought in proportion to the amount of
their labour to have received twelve denarii,--both were put on an
equality in respect of benefit, not some delivered and others
condemned; because even those who laboured more had it from the
goodman of the house himself, both that they were so called as to
come, and that they were so fed as to have no want. But where it is
said, "Therefore, on whom He will He has mercy, and whom He will He
hardeneth," [2642] who "maketh one vessel to honour and another to
dishonour" [2643] it is given indeed without deserving, and freely,
because he is of the same mass to whom it is not given; but evil is
deservedly and of debt repaid, since in the mass of perdition evil is
not repaid to the evil unjustly. And to him to whom it is repaid it is
evil, because it is his punishment; while to Him by whom it is repaid
it is good, because it is His right to do it. Nor is there any
acceptance of persons in the case of two debtors equally guilty, if to
the one is remitted and from the other is claimed that which is
equally owed by both.

Footnotes

[2641] Matt. xx. 9 ff.
[2642] Rom. ix. 18.
[2643] Rom. ix. 21.

Chapter 14.--He Illustrates His Argument by an Example.

But that what I am saying may be made clear by the exhibition of an
example, let us suppose certain twins, born of a certain harlot, and
exposed that they might be taken up by others. One of them has expired
without baptism; the other is baptized. What can we say was in this
case the "fate" or the "fortune," which are here absolutely nothing?
What "acceptance of persons," when with God there is none, even if
there could be any such thing in these cases, seeing that they
certainly had nothing for which the one could be preferred to the
other, and no merits of their own,--whether good, for which the one
might deserve to be baptized; or evil, for which the other might
deserve to die without baptism? Were there any merits in their
parents, when the father was a fornicator, the mother a harlot? But of
whatever kind those merits were, there were certainly not any that
were different in those who died in such different conditions, but all
were common to both. If, then, neither fate, since no stars made them
to differ; nor fortune, since no fortuitous accidents produce these
things; nor the diversity of persons nor of merits have done this;
what remains, so far as it refers to the baptized child, save the
grace of God, which is given freely to vessels made unto honour; but,
as it refers to the unbaptized child, the wrath of God, which is
repaid to the vessels made for dishonour in respect of the deservings
of the lump itself? But in that one which is baptized we constrain you
to confess the grace of God, and convince you that no merit of its own
preceded; but as to that one which died without baptism, why that
sacrament should have been wanting to it, which even you confess to be
needful for all ages, and what in that manner may have been punished
in him, it is for you to see who will not have it that there is any
original sin.

Chapter 15.--The Apostle Meets the Question by Leaving It Unsolved.

Since in the case of those two twins we have without a doubt one and
the same case, the difficulty of the question why the one died in one
way, and the other in another, is solved by the apostle as it were by
not solving it; for, when he had proposed something of the same kind
about two twins, seeing that it was said (not of works, since they had
not as yet done anything either of good or of evil, but of Him that
calleth), "The older shall serve the younger," [2644] and, "Jacob have
I loved, and Esau have I hated;" [2645] and he had prolonged the
horror of this deep thing even to the point of saying, "Therefore hath
He mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardeneth:" [2646] he
perceived at once what the trouble was, and opposed to himself the
words of a gainsayer which he was to check by apostolical authority.
For he says, "You say, then, unto me, "Why doth He yet find fault? For
who has resisted His will?" And to him who says this he answered, "O
man, who art thou that repliest against God? Doth the thing formed say
to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter
power of the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and
another unto dishonour?" [2647] Then, following on, he opened up this
great and hidden secret as far as he judged it fit that it should be
disclosed to men, saying, "But if God, willing to show His wrath and
to demonstrate His power, endured in much patience the vessels of
wrath fitted for destruction, even that He might make known the riches
of His glory on the vessels of mercy which He has prepared for glory."
[2648] This is not only the assistance, but, moreover, the proof of
God's grace--the assistance, namely, in the vessels of mercy, but the
proof in the vessels of wrath; for in these He shows His anger and
makes known His power, because His goodness is so mighty that He even
uses the evil well; and in those He makes known the riches of His
glory on the vessels of mercy, because what the justice of a punisher
requires from the vessels of wrath, the grace of the Deliverer remits
to the vessels of mercy. Nor would the kindness which is bestowed on
some freely appear, unless to other equally guilty and from the same
mass God showed what was really due to both, and condemned them with a
righteous judgment. "For who maketh thee to differ?" [2649] says the
same apostle to a man as it were boasting concerning himself and his
own benefits. "For who maketh thee to differ" from the vessels of
wrath; of course, from the mass of perdition which has sent all by one
into damnation? "Who maketh thee to differ?" And as if he had
answered, "My faith maketh me to differ,--my purpose, my merit,"--he
says, "For what hast thou which thou hast not received? But if thou
hast received it, why dost thou boast as if thou receivedst it
not?"--that is, as if that by which thou art made to differ were of
thine own. Therefore He maketh thee to differ who bestows that whence
thou art made to differ, by removing the penalty that is due, by
conferring the grace which is not due. He maketh to differ, who, when
the darkness was upon the face of the abyss, said, "Let there be
light; and there was light, and divided"--that is, made to
differ--"between the light and the darkness." [2650] For when there
was only darkness, He did not find what He should make to differ; but
by making the light, He made to differ; so that it may be said to the
justified wicked, "For ye were sometime darkness, but now are ye light
in the Lord." [2651] And thus he who glories must glory not in
himself, but in the Lord. He makes to differ who--of those who are not
yet born, and who have not yet done any good or evil, that His
purpose, according to the election, might stand not of works, but of
Himself that calleth--said, The older shall serve the younger, and
commending that very purpose afterwards by the mouth of the prophet,
said, "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." [2652] Because he
said "the election," and in this God does not find made by another
what He may choose, but Himself makes what He may find; just as it is
written of the remnant of Israel: "There is made a remnant by the
election of grace; but if by grace, then it is no more of works,
otherwise grace is no more grace." [2653] On which account you are
certainly foolish who, when the Truth declares, "Not of works, but of
Him that calleth, it was said," say that Jacob was loved on account of
future works which God foreknew that he would do, and thus contradict
the apostle when he says, "Not of works;" as if he could not have
said, "Not of present, but of future works." But he says, "Not of
works," that He might commend grace; "but if of grace, now is it no
more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace." For grace, not due,
but free, precedes, that by it good works may be done; but if good
works should precede, grace should be repaid, as it were, to works,
and thus grace should be no more grace.

Footnotes

Chapter 16.--The Pelagians are Refuted by the Case of the Twin Infants
Dying, the One After, and the Other Without, the Grace of Baptism.

But that every lurking-place of your darkness may be taken away from
you, I have proposed to you the case of such twins as were not
assisted by the merits of their parents, and both died in the very
beginning of infancy, the one baptized, the other without baptism;
lest you should say that God foreknew their future works, as you say
of Jacob and Esau, in opposition to the apostle. For how did He
foreknow that those things should be, which, in those infants who were
to die in infancy, He rather foreknew as not to be, since His
foreknowledge cannot be deceived? Or what does it profit those who are
taken away from this life that wickedness may not change their
understanding, nor deceit beguile their soul, if even the sin which
has not been done, said, or thought, is thus punished as if it had
been committed? Because, if it is most absurd, silly, and senseless,
that certain men should have to be condemned for those sins, the guilt
of which they could neither derive from their parents, as you say, nor
could incur themselves, either by committing them, or even by
conceiving of them, there comes back to you that unbaptized twin
brother of the baptized one, and silently asks you for what reason he
was made to differ from his brother in respect of happiness,--why he
was punished with that infelicity, so that, while his brother was
adopted into a child of God, he himself should not receive that
sacrament which, as you confess, is necessary for every age, if, even
as there is not a fortune or a fate, or an acceptance of persons with
God, so there is no gift of grace without merits, and no original sin.
To this dumb child you absolutely submit your tongue and voice; to
this witness who says nothing,--you have nothing at all to say!

Chapter 17 [VIII.]--Even the Desire of an Imperfect Good is a Gift of
Grace, Otherwise Grace Would Be Given According to Merits.

Let us now see, as we can, the nature of this thing which they will
have to precede in man, in order that he may be regarded as worthy of
the assistance of grace, and to the merit of which in him grace is not
given as if unearned, but is rendered as due; and thus grace is no
more grace. Let us see, however, what this is. "Under the name," say
they, "of grace, they so assert fate as to say that unless God should
have inspired the desire for good, and that, imperfect good, into
unwilling and resisting man, he would neither be able to decline from
evil nor to grasp after good." I have already shown what empty things
they speak about fate and grace. Now the question which I ought to
consider is this, whether God inspires the desire of good into
unwilling and resisting man, that he may be no longer unwilling, no
longer resisting, but consenting to the good and willing the good. For
those men will have it that the desire of good in man begins from man
himself; that the merit of this beginning is, moreover, attended with
the grace of completion--if, at least, they will allow so much as even
this. For Pelagius says that what is good is "more easily" fulfilled
if grace assists. [2654] By which addition--that is, by adding "more
easily"--he certainly signifies that he is of the opinion that, even
if the aid of grace should be wanting, yet good might be accomplished,
although with greater difficulty, by free will. But let me prescribe
to my present opponents what they should think in this matter, without
speaking of the author of this heresy himself. Let us allow them, with
their free will, to be free even from Pelagius himself, and rather
give heed to their words which they have written in this letter to
which I am replying.

Footnotes

[2654] See above, On the Grace of Christ, ch. 8.

Chapter 18.--The Desire of Good is God's Gift.

For they have thought that it was to be objected to us that we say
"that God inspires into unwilling and resisting man the desire," not
of any very great good, but "even of imperfect good." Possibly, then,
they themselves are keeping open, in some sense at least, a place for
grace, as thinking that man may have the desire of good without grace,
but only of imperfect good; while of perfect, he could not easily have
the desire with grace, but except with it they could not have it at
all. Truly, even in this way, too, they are saying that God's grace is
given according to our merits, which Pelagius, in the ecclesiastical
meeting in the East, condemned, in the fear of being condemned. For if
without God's grace the desire of good begins with ourselves, merit
itself will have begun--to which, as if of debt, comes the assistance
of grace; and thus God's grace will not be bestowed freely, but will
be given according to our merit. But that he might furnish a reply to
the future Pelagius, the Lord does not say, "Without me it is with
difficulty that you can do anything," but He says, "Without me ye can
do nothing." [2655] And, that He might also furnish an answer to these
future heretics, in that very same evangelical saying He does not say,
"Without me you can perfect nothing," but "do" nothing. For if He had
said "perfect," they might say that God's aid is necessary not for
beginning good, which is of ourselves, but for perfecting it. But let
them hear also the apostle. For when the Lord says, "Without me ye can
do nothing," in this one word He comprehends both the beginning and
the ending. The apostle, indeed, as if he were an expounder of the
Lord's saying, distinguished both very clearly when he says, "Because
He who hath begun a good work in you will perfect it even to the day
of Christ Jesus." [2656] But in the Holy Scriptures, in the writings
of the same apostle, we find more about that of which we are speaking.
For we are now speaking of the desire of good, and if they will have
this to begin of ourselves and to be perfected by God, let them see
what they can answer to the apostle when he says, "Not that we are
sufficient to think anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is
of God." [2657] "To think anything," he says,--he certainly means, "to
think anything good;" but is it less to think than to desire. Because
we think all that we desire, but we do not desire all that we think;
because sometimes also we think what we do not desire. Since, then, it
is a smaller thing to think than to desire,--for a man may think good
which he does not yet desire, and by advancing may afterwards desire
what before without desire he thought of,--how are we not sufficient
as of ourselves to that which is less, that is, to the thinking of
something good, but our sufficiency is of God; while to that which is
greater,--that is, to the desire of some good thing--without the
divine help, we are sufficient of free will? For what the apostle says
here is not, "Not that we are sufficient as of ourselves to think that
which is perfect;" but he says, "to think anything," to which
"nothing" is the contrary. And this is the meaning of what the Lord
says, "Without me ye can do nothing."

Footnotes

[2655] John xv. 5.
[2656] Phil. i. 6.
[2657] 2 Cor. iii. 5.

Chapter 19 [IX.]--He Interprets the Scriptures Which the Pelagians
Make Ill Use of.

But assuredly, as to what is written, "The preparation of the heart is
man's part, and the answer of the tongue is from the Lord," [2658]
they are misled by an imperfect understanding, so as to think that to
prepare the heart--that is, to begin good--pertains to man without the
aid of God's grace. Be it far from the children of promise thus to
understand it! As if, when they heard the Lord saying, "Without me ye
can do nothing," [2659] they would convict Him by saying, "Behold
without Thee we can prepare the heart;" or when they heard from Paul
the apostle, "Not that we are sufficient to think anything as of
ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God," [2660] as if they would
also convict him, saying, "Behold, we are sufficient of ourselves to
prepare our heart, and thus also to think some good thing; for who can
without good thought prepare his heart for good?" Be it far from any
thus to understand the passage, except the proud maintainers of free
will and forsakers of the catholic faith! Therefore, since it is
written, "It is man's part to prepare the heart, and the answer of the
tongue is from the Lord," it is that man prepares his heart, not,
however, without the aid of God, who so touches the heart that man
prepares the heart. But in the answer of the tongue--that is, in that
which the divine tongue answers to the prepared heart--man has no
part; but the whole is from the Lord God.

Footnotes

[2658] Prov. xvi. 1.
[2659] John xv. 5.
[2660] 2 Cor. iii. 5.

Chapter 20.--God's Agency is Needful Even in Man's Doings.

For as it is said, "It is man's part to prepare his heart, and the
answer of the tongue is from the Lord;" so also is it said, "Open thy
mouth, and I will fill it." [2661] For although, save by His
assistance without whom we can do nothing, we cannot open our mouth,
yet we open it by His aid and by our own agency, while the Lord fills
it without our agency. For what is to prepare the heart and to open
the mouth, but to prepare the will? And yet in the same scriptures is
read, "The will is prepared by the Lord," [2662] and, "Thou shalt open
my lips, and my mouth shall show forth Thy praise." [2663] So God
admonishes us to prepare our will in what we read," It is man's part
to prepare his heart;" and yet, that man may do this, God helps him,
because the will is prepared by the Lord. And," Open thy mouth." This
He so says by way of command, as that nobody can do this unless it is
done by His aid, to whom it is said, "Thou shalt open my lips." Are
any of these men so foolish as to contend that the mouth is one thing,
the lips another; and to say with marvellous triviality that man opens
his own mouth, and God opens man's lips? And yet God restrains them
from even that absurdity where He says to Moses His servant, "I will
open thy mouth, and I will instruct thee what thou oughtest to speak."
[2664] In that clause, therefore, where He says, "Open thy mouth and I
will fill it," it seems, as it were, that one of them pertains to man,
the other to God. But in this, where it is said, "I will open thy
mouth and will instruct thee," both belong to God. Why is this, except
that in one of these cases He co-operates with man as the agent, in
the other He does it alone?

Footnotes

Chapter 21.--Man Does No Good Thing Which God Does Not Cause Him to
Do.

Wherefore God does many good things in man which man does not do; but
man does none which God does not cause man to do. Accordingly, there
would be no desire of good in man from the Lord if it were not a good;
but if it is a good, we have it not save from Him who is supremely and
incommunicably good. For what is the desire for good but love, of
which John the apostle speaks without any ambiguity, and says, "Love
is of God"? [2665] Nor is its beginning of ourselves, and its
perfection of God; but if love is of God, we have the whole of it from
God. May God by all means turn away this folly of making ourselves
first in His gifts, Himself last,--because "His mercy shall prevent
me." [2666] And it is He to whom is faithfully and truthfully sung,
"For Thou hast prevented him with the blessings of sweetness." [2667]
And what is here more fitly understood than that very desire of good
of which we are speaking? For good begins then to be longed for when
it has begun to grow sweet. But when good is done by the fear of
penalty, not by the love of righteousness, good is not yet well done.
Nor is that done in the heart which seems to be done in the act when a
man would rather not do it if he could evade it with impunity.
Therefore the "blessing of sweetness" is God's grace, by which is
caused in us that what He prescribes to us delights us, and we desire
it,--that is, we love it; in which if God does not precede us, not
only is it not perfected, but it is not even begun, from us. For, if
without Him we are able to do nothing actually, we are able neither to
begin nor to perfect,--because to begin, it is said "His mercy shall
prevent me;" [2668] to finish, it is said, "His mercy shall follow
me." [2669]

Footnotes

Chapter 22 [X.]--According to Whose Purpose the Elect are Called.

Why, then, is it that, in what follows, where they mention what they
themselves think, they say they confess "That grace also assists the
good purpose of every one, but that yet it does not infuse the desire
of virtue into a reluctant heart"? Because they so say this as if man
of himself, without God's assistance, has a good purpose and a desire
of virtue; and this precedent merit is worthy of being assisted by the
subsequent grace of God. For they think, perchance, that the apostle
thus said, "For we know that He worketh all things for good to them
that love God, to them who are called according to the purpose,"
[2670] so as to wish the purpose of man to be understood, which
purpose, as a good merit, the mercy of the God that calleth might
follow; being ignorant that it is said, "Who are called according to
the purpose," so that there may be understood the purpose of God, not
man, whereby those whom He foreknew and predestinated as conformed to
the image of His Son, He elected before the foundation of the world.
For not all the called are called according to purpose, since "many
are called, few are chosen." [2671] They, therefore, are called
according to the purpose, who were elected before the foundation of
the world. Of this purpose of God, that also was said which I have
already mentioned concerning the twins Esau and Jacob, "That according
to the election the purpose of God might remain, not of works, but of
Him that calleth; it was said, that the elder shall serve the
younger." [2672] This purpose of God is also mentioned in that place
where, writing to Timothy, he says, "Labour with the gospel according
to the power of God, who saves us and calls us with this holy calling;
not according to our works, but according to His purpose and grace,
which was given to us in Christ Jesus before the eternal ages, but is
now made manifest by the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ." [2673]
This, then, is the purpose of God, whereof it is said, "He worketh
together all things for good for those who are called according to the
purpose." But subsequent grace indeed assists man's good purpose, but
the purpose would not itself exist if grace did not precede. The
desire of man, also, which is called good, although in beginning to
exist it is aided by grace, yet does not begin without grace, but is
inspired by Him of whom the apostle says, "But thanks be to God, who
has given the same desire for you in the heart of Titus." [2674] If
God gives desire that every one may have it for others, who else will
give it that a man may have it for himself?

Footnotes

Chapter 23.--Nothing is Commanded to Man Which is Not Given by God.

Since these things are so, I see that nothing is commanded to man by
the Lord in the Holy Scriptures, for the sake of trying his free will,
which is not found either to begin by His goodness, or to be asked in
order to demonstrate the aid of grace; nor does man at all begin to be
changed by the beginning of faith from evil to good, unless the
unbought and gratuitous mercy of God effects this in him. Of which one
recalling his thought, as we read in the Psalms, says, "Shall God
forget to be gracious? or will He restrain His mercies in His anger?
And I said, Now have I begun; this change is of the right hand of the
Most High." [2675] When, therefore, he had said, "Now have I begun,"
he does not say, "This change is of my will," but "of the right hand
of the Most High." So, therefore, let God's grace be thought of, that
from the beginning of his good changing, even to the end of his
completion, he who glorieth may glory in the Lord; because, as no one
can perfect good without the Lord, so no one can begin it without the
Lord. But let this be the end of this book, that the attention of the
reader may be refreshed and strengthened for what follows.

Footnotes

Book III.

Augustin goes on to refute other matters which are calumniously
objected by the Pelagians in the same letter sent to Thessalonica; and
expounds, in opposition to their heresy, what those who are truly
Catholic say concerning the utility of the law; what they teach of the
effect and virtue of baptism; what of the discrepancy between the two
Testaments, the Old and the New; what concerning the righteousness and
perfection of the prophets and apostles; what of the appellation of
sin in Christ, when He is said in the likeness of sinful flesh
concerning sin to have condemned sin, or to have become sin; and
finally, what they profess concerning the fulfilment of the
commandments in the future life.

Chapter 1 [I.]--Statement.

There still follow things which they calumniously object to us; they
do not yet begin to work out those things which they themselves think.
But lest the prolixity of these writings should be an offence, I have
divided those matters which they object into two Books,--the former of
which being completed, which is the Second Book of this entire work, I
am here commencing the other, and joining it as the Third to the First
and Second.

Chapter 2 [II.]--The Misrepresentation of the Pelagians Concerning the
Use of the Old Law.

They declare "that we say that the law of the Old Testament was given
not for the end that it might justify the obedient, but rather that it
might become the cause of greater sin." Certainly, they do not
understand what we say concerning the law; because we say what the
apostle says, whom they do not understand. For who can say that they
are not justified who are obedient to the law, when, unless they were
justified, they could not be obedient? But we say, that by the law is
effected that what God wills to be done is heard, but that by grace is
effected that the law is obeyed. "For not the hearers of the law,"
says the apostle, "are just before God, but the doers of the law shall
be justified." [2676] Therefore the law makes hearers of
righteousness, grace makes doers. "For what was impossible to the
law," says the same apostle, "in that it was weak through the flesh,
God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin
condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be
fulfilled in us who walk not according to the flesh, but according to
the Spirit." [2677] This is what we say;--let them pray that they may
one day understand it, and not dispute so as never to understand it.
For it is impossible that the law should be fulfilled by the flesh,
that is, by carnal presumption, in which the proud, who are ignorant
of the righteousness of God,--that is, which is of God to man, that he
may be righteous,--and desirous of establishing their own
righteousness,--as if by their own will, unassisted from above, the
law could be fulfilled,--are not subjected to the righteousness of
God. [2678] Therefore the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in
them who walk not according to the flesh--that is, according to man,
ignorant of the righteousness of God and desirous of establishing his
own--but walk according to the Spirit. But who walks according to the
Spirit, except whosoever is led by the Spirit of God? "For as many as
are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God." [2679]
Therefore "the letter killeth, but the Spirit maketh alive." [2680]
And the letter is not evil because it killeth; but it convicts the
wicked of transgression. "For the law is holy, and the commandment
holy and just and good. Was, then," says he, "that which is good made
death unto me? By no means; but sin, that it might appear sin, worked
death in me by that which is good, that it might become above measure
a sinner or a sin by the commandment." [2681] This is what is the
meaning of "the letter killeth." "For the sting of death is sin, but
the strength of sin is the law;" [2682] because by the prohibition it
increases the desires of sin, and thence slays a man unless grace by
coming to his assistance makes him alive. [2683]

Footnotes

Chapter 3.--Scriptural Confirmation of the Catholic Doctrine.

This is what we say; this is that about which they object to us that
we say "that the law was so given as to be a cause of greater sin."
They do not hear the apostle saying, "For the law worketh wrath; for
where no law is, there is no transgression;" [2684] and, "The law was
added for the sake of transgression until the seed should come to whom
the promise was made;" [2685] and, "If there had been a law given
which could have given life, righteousness should altogether have been
by the law; but the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the
promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe."
[2686] Hence it is that the Old Testament, from the Mount Sinai, where
the law was given, gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. "Now we," says
he, "are not children of the bondmaid but of the freewoman." [2687]
Therefore they are not children of the freewoman who have accepted the
law of the letter, whereby they can be shown to be not only sinners,
but moreover transgressors; but they who have received the Spirit of
grace, whereby the law itself, holy and just and good, may be
fulfilled. This is what we say: let them attend and not contend; let
them seek enlightenment and not bring false accusations.

Footnotes

Chapter 4 [III.]--Misrepresentation Concerning the Effect of Baptism.

"They assert," say they, "that baptism, moreover, does not make men
new--that is, does not give complete remission of sins; but they
contend that they are partly made children of God and partly remain
children of the world, that is, of the devil." They deceive; they lay
traps; they shuffle; we do not say this. For we say that all men who
are children of the devil are also children of the world; but not that
all children of the world are also children of the devil. Far be it
from us to say that the holy fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and
others of this kind, were children of the devil when they were
begetting in marriage, and those believers who until now and still
hereafter continue to beget. And yet we cannot contradict the Lord
when He says, "The children of this world marry and give in marriage."
[2688] Some, therefore, are children of this world, and yet are not
children of the devil. For although the devil is the author and source
of all sins, yet it is not every sin that makes children of the devil;
for the children of God also sin, since if they say they have no sins
they deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them. [2689] But they
sin in virtue of that condition by which they are still children of
this world; but by that grace wherewith they are the children of God
they certainly sin not, because every one that is born of God sinneth
not. [2690] But unbelief makes children of the devil; and unbelief is
specially called sin, as if it were the only one, if it is not
expressed what is the nature of the sin. As when the "apostle" is
spoken of, if it be not expressed what apostle, none is understood but
Paul; because he is better known by his many epistles, and he laboured
more than they all. For which reason, in what the Lord said of the
Holy Spirit, "He shall convict the world of sin," [2691] He meant
unbelief to be understood; for He said this when He was explaining,
"Of sin because they believed not on me," [2692] and when He says, "If
I had not come and spoken to them, they should not have sin." [2693]
For He meant not that before they had no sin, but He wished to
indicate that very want of faith by which they did not believe Him
even when He was present to them and speaking to them; since they
belonged to him of whom the apostle says, "According to the prince of
the power of the air, who now worketh in the children of unbelief."
[2694] Therefore they in whom there is not faith are the children of
the devil, because they have not in the inner man any reason why there
should be forgiven them whatever is committed either by human
infirmity, or by ignorance, or by any evil will whatever. But those
are the children of God who certainly, if they should "say that they
have no sin, deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them, but
immediately" (as it continues) "when they confess their sins" (which
the children of the devil do not do, or do not do according to the
faith which is peculiar to the children of God), "He is faithful and
just to forgive them their sins, and to cleanse them from all
unrighteousness." [2695] And in order that what we say may be more
fully understood, let Jesus Himself be heard, who certainly was
speaking to the children of God when He said: "And if ye, being evil,
know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your
Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask Him."
[2696] For if these were not the children of God, He would not say to
them, "Your Father which is in heaven." And yet He says that they are
evil, and that they know how to give good gifts to their children. Are
they, then, evil in that they are the children of God? Away with the
thought! But they are thence evil because they are still the children
of this world, although now made children of God by the pledge of the
Holy Spirit.

Footnotes

Chapter 5.--Baptism Puts Away All Sins, But It Does Not at Once Heal
All Infirmities.

Baptism, therefore, washes away indeed all sins--absolutely all sins,
whether of deeds or words or thoughts, whether original or added,
whether such as are committed in ignorance or allowed in knowledge;
but it does not take away the weakness which the regenerate man
resists when he fights the good fight, but to which he consents when
as man he is overtaken in any fault; on account of the former,
rejoicing with thanksgiving, but on account of the latter, groaning in
the utterance of prayers. On account of the former, saying, "What
shall I render to the Lord for all that He has given me?" [2697] On
account of the latter, saying, "Forgive us our debts." [2698] On
account of the former, saying, "I will love Thee, O Lord, my
strength." [2699] On account of the latter, saying, "Have mercy on me,
O Lord; for I am weak." [2700] On account of the former, saying, "Mine
eyes are ever towards the Lord; for He shall pluck my feet out of the
net." [2701] On account of the latter, saying, "Mine eye is troubled
with wrath." [2702] And there are innumerable passages with which the
divine writings are filled, which alternately, either in exultation
over God's benefits or in lamentation over our own evils, are uttered
by children of God by faith as long as they are still children of this
world in respect of the weakness of this life; whom, nevertheless, God
distinguishes from the children of the devil, not only by the laver of
regeneration, but moreover by the righteousness of that faith which
worketh by love, because the just lives by faith. But this weakness
with which we contend, with alternating failure and progress, even to
the death of the body, and which is of great importance as to what it
can overcome in us, shall be consumed by another regeneration, of
which the Lord says, "In the regeneration when the Son of man shall
sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve
thrones," [2703] etc. Certainly in this passage He without doubt calls
the last resurrection the regeneration, which Paul the Apostle also
calls both the adoption and the redemption, where he says, "But even
we ourselves, which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, ourselves
also groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, the redemption,
of our body." [2704] Have we not been regenerated, adopted, and
redeemed by the holy washing? And yet there remains a regeneration, an
adoption, a redemption, which we ought now patiently to be waiting for
as to come in the end, that we may then be in no degree any longer
children of this world. Whosoever, then, takes away from baptism that
which we only receive by its means, corrupts the faith; but whosoever
attributes to it now that which we shall receive by its means indeed,
but yet hereafter, cuts off hope. For if any one should ask of me
whether we have been saved by baptism, I shall not be able to deny it,
since the apostle says, "He saved us by the washing of regeneration
and renewing of the Holy Ghost." [2705] But if he should ask whether
by the same washing He has already absolutely in every way saved us, I
shall answer: It is not so. Because the same apostle also says, "For
we are saved by hope; but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a
man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see
not, we with patience wait for it." [2706] Therefore the salvation of
man is effected in baptism, because whatever sin he has derived from
his parents is remitted, or whatever, moreover, he himself has sinned
on his own account before baptism; but his salvation will hereafter be
such that he cannot sin at all.

Chapter 6 [IV.]--The Calumny Concerning the Old Testament and the
Righteous Men of Old.

Now if these things are so, out of these things are rebutted those
which they subsequently object to us. For what catholic would say that
which they charge us with saying, "that the Holy Spirit was not the
assister of virtue in the old testament," unless when we so understand
"the old testament" in the manner in which the apostle spoke of it as
"gendering from Mount Sinai into bondage"? But because in it was
prefigured the new testament, the men of God who at that time
understood this according to the ordering of the times, were indeed
the stewards and bearers of the old testament, but are shown to be the
heirs of the new. Shall we deny that he belongs to the new testament
who says, "Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit
within me"? [2707] or he who says, "He hath set my feet upon a rock,
and directed my goings; and he hath put a new song in my mouth, even a
hymn to our God"? [2708] or that father of the faithful before the old
testament which is from Mount Sinai, of whom the apostle says,
"Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; yet even a man's
testament, when it is confirmed, no man disannulleth or addeth
thereto. To Abraham and to his seed were the promises made. He saith
not, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one; and to thy seed, which
is Christ. And this I say," said he, "that the testament confirmed by
God, the law which was made four hundred and thirty years after, does
not weaken, so as to make the promise of none effect. For if the
inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it
to Abraham by promise." [2709]

Footnotes

[2707] Ps. li. 10.
[2708] Ps. xl. 2, 3.
[2709] Gal. iii. 15 ff.

Chapter 7.--The New Testament is More Ancient Than the Old; But It Was
Subsequently Revealed.

Here, certainly, if we ask whether this testament, which, he says,
being confirmed by God was not weakened by the law, which was made
four hundred and thirty years after, is to be understood as the new or
the old one, who can hesitate to answer "the new, but hidden in the
prophetic shadows until the time should come wherein it should be
revealed in Christ"? For if we should say the old, what will that be
which genders from Mount Sinai to bondage? For there was made the law
four hundred and thirty years after, by which law he asserts that this
testament of the promise of Abraham could not be weakened; and he will
have this which was made by Abraham to pertain rather to us, whom he
will have to be children of the freewoman, not of the bondwoman, heirs
by the promise, not by the law, when he says, "For if the inheritance
be by the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by
promise." [2710] So that, because the law was made four hundred and
thirty years after, it might enter that the offence might abound;
[2711] since by sin the pride of man presuming on his own
righteousness is convinced of transgression, and where sin abounded
grace much more abounded [2712] by the faith of the now humble man
failing in the law and taking refuge in God's mercy. Therefore, when
he had said, "For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no longer of
promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise," [2713] as if it might
be said to him, "Why then was the law made afterwards? "he added and
said, "What then is the law?" [2714] To which interrogation he
immediately replied, "It was added because of transgression, until the
seed should come to which the promise was made." [2715] This he says
again, thus: "For if they who are of the law be heirs, faith is made
void, and the promise is made of none effect: because the law worketh
wrath: for where there is no law, there is no transgression." [2716]
What he says in the former testimony: "For if the inheritance be of
the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by
promise," this he says in the latter: "For if they who are of the law
be heirs, faith is made void; and the promise is made of none effect;"
sufficiently showing that to our faith (which certainly is of the new
testament) belongs what God gave to Abraham by promise. And what he
says in the former testimony, "What then is the law?" and answered,
"It was added for the sake of transgression," this he instantly added
in the latter testimony, "For the law worketh wrath: for where there
is no law, there is no transgression."

Footnotes

Chapter 8.--All Righteous Men Before and After Abraham are Children of
the Promise and of Grace.

Whether, then, Abraham, or righteous men before him or after him, even
to Moses himself, by whom was given the testament gendering to bondage
from Mount Sinai, or the rest of the prophets after him, and the holy
men of God till John the Baptist, they are all children of the promise
and of grace according to Isaac the son of the freewoman,--not of the
law, but of the promise, heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ. Far
be it from us to deny that righteous Noah and the righteous men of the
earlier times, and whoever from that time till the time of Abraham
could be righteous, either manifestly or hiddenly, belong to the
Jerusalem which is above, who is our mother, although they are found
to be earlier in time than Sarah, who bore the prophecy and figure of
the free mother herself. How much more evidently, then, after Abraham,
to whom that promise was declared, that he should be called the father
of many nations, must all, whoever have pleased God, be esteemed the
children of the promise! For from Abraham, and the righteous men who
followed him, the generation is not found more true, but the prophecy
more plain.

Chapter 9.--Who are the Children of the Old Covenant.

But those belong to the old testament, "which gendereth from Mount
Sinai to bondage," which is Agar, who, when they have received a law
which is holy and just and good, think that the letter can suffice
them for life; and do not seek the divine mercy, so as they may become
doers of the law, but, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and
wishing to establish their own righteousness, are not subject to the
righteousness of God. Of this kind was that multitude which murmured
against God in the wilderness, and made an idol; and that multitude
which even in the very land of promise committed fornication after
strange gods. But this multitude, even in the old testament itself,
was strongly rebuked. They, moreover, whoever they were at that time
who followed after those earthly promises alone which God promises
there, and who were ignorant of that which those promises signify
under the new testament, and who kept God's commandments with the
desire of gaining and with the fear of losing those
promises,--certainly did not observe them, but only seemed to
themselves to observe. For there was no faith in them that worked by
love, but earthly cupidity and carnal fear. But he who thus fulfils
the commandments beyond a doubt fulfils them unwillingly, and then
does not do them in his heart; for he would rather not do them at all,
if in respect of those things which he desires and fears he might be
allowed to neglect them with impunity. And thus, in the will itself
within him, he is guilty; and it is here that God, who gives the
command, looks. Such were the children of the earthly Jerusalem,
concerning which the apostle says, "For she is in bondage with her
children," [2717] and belongs to the old testament "which gendereth to
bondage from Mount Sinai, which is Agar." Of that same kind were they
who crucified the Lord, and continued in the same unbelief. Thence
there are still their children in the great multitude of the Jews,
although now the new testament as it was prophesied is made plain and
confirmed by the blood of Christ; and the gospel is made known from
the river where He was baptized and began His teachings, even to the
ends of the earth. And these Jews, according to the prophecies which
they read, are dispersed everywhere over all the earth, that even from
their writings may not be wanting a testimony to Christian truth.

Footnotes

[2717] Gal. iv. 25.

Chapter 10.--The Old Law Also Given by God.

And it is for this reason that God made the old testament, because it
pleased God to veil the heavenly promises in earthly promises, as if
established in reward, until the fulness of time; and to give to a
people which longed for earthly blessings, and therefore had a hard
heart, a law, which, although spiritual, was yet written on tables of
stone. Because, with the exception of the sacraments of the old books,
which were only enjoined for the sake of their significance (although
in them also, since they are to be spiritually understood, the law is
rightly called spiritual), the other matters certainly which pertain
to piety and to good living must not be referred by any interpretation
to some significancy, [2718] but are to be done absolutely as they are
spoken. Assuredly no one will doubt that that law of God was necessary
not alone for that people at that time, but also is now necessary for
us for the right ordering of our life. For if Christ took away from us
that very heavy yoke of many observances, so that we are not
circumcised according to the flesh, we do not immolate victims of the
cattle, we do not rest even from necessary works on the Sabbath,
retaining the seventh in the revolution of the days, and other things
of this kind; but keep them as spiritually understood, and, the
symbolizing shadows being removed, are watchful in the light of those
things which are signified by them; shall we therefore say, that when
it is written that whoever finds another man's property of any kind
that has been lost, should return it to him who has lost it, [2719] it
does not pertain to us? and many other like things whereby people
learn to live piously and uprightly? and especially the Decalogue
itself, which is contained in those two tables of stone, apart from
the carnal observance of the Sabbath, which signifies spiritual
sanctification and rest? For who can say that Christians ought not to
be observant to serve the one God with religious obedience, not to
worship an idol, not to take the name of the Lord in vain, to honour
one's parents, not to commit adulteries, murders, thefts, false
witness, not to covet another man's wife, or anything at all that
belongs to another man? Who is so impious as to say that he does not
keep those precepts of the law because he is a Christian, and is
established not under the law, but under grace?

Footnotes

[2718] [i.e., they must not be treated allegorically, as if their
literal sense was not important, and they were given only to teach
something symbolically or typically.--W.]
[2719] Lev. vi. 3.

Chapter 11.--Distinction Between the Children of the Old and of the
New Testaments.

But there is plainly this great difference, that they who are
established under the law, whom the letter killeth, do these things
either with the desire of gaining, or with the fear of losing earthly
happiness; and that thus they do not truly do them, since fleshly
desire, by which sin is rather bartered or increased, is not healed by
desire of another kind. These pertain to the old testament, which
genders to bondage; because carnal fear and desire make them servants,
gospel faith and hope and love do not make them children. But they who
are placed under grace, whom the Spirit quickens, do these things of
faith which worketh by love in the hope of good things, not carnal but
spiritual, not earthly but heavenly, not temporal but eternal;
especially believing on the Mediator, by whom they do not doubt but
that a Spirit of grace is ministered to them, so that they may do
these things well, and that they may be pardoned when they sin. These
pertain to the new testament, are the children of promise, and are
regenerated by God the Father and a free mother. Of this kind were all
the righteous men of old, and Moses himself, the minister of the old
testament, the heir of the new,--because of the faith whereby we live,
of one and the same they lived, believing the incarnation, passion,
and resurrection of Christ as future, which we believe as already
accomplished,--even until John the Baptist himself, as it were a
certain limit of the old dispensation, who, signifying that the
Mediator Himself would come, not with any shadow of the future or
allegorical intimation, or with any prophetical announcement, but
pointing Him out with his finger, said: "Behold the Lamb of God;
behold Him who taketh away the sin of the world." [2720] As if saying,
Whom many righteous men have desired to see, on whom, as about to
come, they have believed from the beginning of the human race itself,
concerning whom the promises were spoken to Abraham, of whom Moses
wrote, of whom the law and the prophets are witnesses: "Behold the
Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world." From this John and
afterwards, all those things concerning Christ began to become past or
present, which by all the righteous men of the previous time were
believed, hoped for, desired, as future. Therefore the faith is the
same as well in those who, although not yet in name, were in fact
previously Christians, as in those who not only are so but are also
called so; and in both there is the same grace by the Holy Spirit.
Whence says the apostle: "We having the same Spirit of faith,
according as it is written, I believed, therefore have I spoken; we
also believe, and therefore speak." [2721]

Footnotes

[2720] John i. 29.
[2721] 2 Cor. iv. 13.

Chapter 12.--The Old Testament is Properly One Thing--The Old
Instrument Another.

Therefore, by a custom of speech already prevailing, in one way the
law and all the prophets who prophesied until John are called the "Old
Testament;" although this is more definitely called the "Old
Instrument" rather than the "Old Testament;" but this name is used in
another way by the apostolical authority, whether expressly or
impliedly. For the apostle is express when he says, "Until this day,
as long as Moses is read, remaineth the same veil in the reading of
the old testament; because it is not revealed, because it is made of
no effect in Christ." [2722] For thus certainly the old testament
referred to the ministry of Moses. Moreover, he says, "That we should
serve in the newness of the Spirit, and not in the oldness of the
letter," [2723] signifying that same testament under the name of the
letter. In another place also, "Who also hath made us able ministers
of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the Spirit: for the
letter killeth, but the Spirit maketh alive." [2724] And here, by the
mention of the new, he certainly meant the former to be understood as
the old. But much more evidently, although he did not say either old
or new, he distinguished the two testaments and the two sons of
Abraham, the one of the bondwoman, the other of the free, as I have
above mentioned. For what can be more express than his saying, "Tell
me, ye that desire to be under the law, have ye not heard the law? For
it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the
other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after
the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are in
allegory; for these are the two testaments; the one in the Mount
Sinai, gendering to bondage, which is Agar. For Sinai is a mountain in
Arabia, which is associated with Jerusalem which now is, for it is in
bondage with her children. But Jerusalem that is above is free, which
is our mother?" [2725] What is more clear, what more certain, what
more remote from all obscurity and ambiguity to the children of the
promise? And a little after, "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the
children of promise." [2726] Also a little after, "But we, brethren,
are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free," [2727] with the
liberty with which Christ has made us free. Let us, therefore, choose
whether to call the righteous men of old the children of the bondwoman
or of the free. Be it far from us to say, of the bondwoman; therefore
if of the free, they pertain to the new testament in the Holy Spirit,
whom, as making alive, the apostle opposes to the killing letter. For
on what ground do they not belong to the grace of the new testament,
from whose words and looks we convict and rebut such most frantic and
ungrateful enemies of the same grace as these?

Footnotes

Chapter 13.--Why One of the Covenants is Called Old, the Other New.

But some one will say, "In what way is that called the old which was
given by Moses four hundred and thirty years after; and that called
the new which was given so many years before to Abraham?" Let him who
on this subject is disturbed, not litigiously but earnestly, first
understand that when from its earlier time one is called "old," and
from its posterior time the other "new," it is the revelation of them
that is considered in their names, not their institution. Because the
old testament was revealed through Moses, by whom the holy and just
and good law was given, whereby should be brought about not the doing
away but the knowledge of sin,--by which the proud might be convicted
who were desirous of establishing their own righteousness, as if they
had no need of divine help, and being made guilty of the letter, might
flee to the Spirit of grace, not to be justified by their own
righteousness, but by that of God--that is, by the righteousness which
was given to them of God. For as the same apostle says, "By the law is
the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law
is manifested, being witnessed by the law and by the prophets." [2728]
Because the law, by the very fact that in it no man is justified,
affords a witness to the righteousness of God. For that in the law no
man is justified before God is manifest, because "the just by faith
lives." [2729] Thus, therefore, although the law does not justify the
wicked when he is convicted of transgression, it sends to the God who
justifieth, and thus affords a testimony to the righteousness of God.
Moreover, the prophets offer testimony to God's righteousness by
fore-announcing Christ, "who is made unto us wisdom from God, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: that, as it is
written, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." [2730] But that
law was kept hidden from the beginning, when nature itself convicted
wicked men, who did to others what they would not have done to
themselves. But the revelation of the new testament in Christ was made
when He was manifested in the flesh, wherein appeared the
righteousness of God--that is, the righteousness which is to men from
God. For hence he says, "But now the righteousness of God without the
law is manifested." [2731] This is the reason why the former is called
the old testament, because it was revealed in the earlier time; and
the latter the new, because it was revealed in the later time. In a
word, it is because the old testament pertains to the old man, from
which it is necessary that a man should make a beginning; but the new
to the new man, by which a man ought to pass from his old state. Thus,
in the former are earthly promises, in the latter heavenly promises;
because this pertained to God's mercy, that no one should think that
even earthly felicity of any kind whatever could be conferred on
anybody, save from the Lord, who is the Creator of all things. But if
God is worshipped for the sake of that earthly happiness, the worship
is that of a slave, belonging to the children of the bondmaid; but if
for the sake of God Himself, so that in the life eternal God may be
all things in all, it is a free service belonging to the children of
the freewoman, who is our mother eternal in the heavens--who first
seemed, as it were, barren, when she had not any children manifest;
but now we see what was prophesied concerning her: "Rejoice, thou
barren, that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest
not: for there are many children of the desolate more than of her who
has an husband," [2732] --that is, more than of that Jerusalem, who in
a certain manner is married in the bond of the law, and is in bondage
with her children. In the time, then, of the old testament, we say
that the Holy Spirit, in those who even then were the children of
promise according to Isaac, was not only an assistant, which these men
think is sufficient for their opinion, but also a bestower of virtue;
and this they deny, attributing it rather to their free will, in
contradiction to those fathers who knew how to cry unto God with
truthful piety, "I will love Thee, O Lord, my strength." [2733]

Footnotes

Chapter 14 [V.]--Calumny Concerning the Righteousness of the Prophets
and Apostles.

They say, moreover, "that all the apostles or prophets are not defined
as entirely holy by us, but that we say that they were less wicked in
comparison with those that were worse; and that this is the
righteousness to which God affords His testimony, so that, as the
prophet says that Sodom was justified in comparison with the Jews, so
also we say that the saints exercised some goodness in comparison with
criminal men." Be it far from us to say such things; but either they
are not able to understand, or they are unwilling to observe, or, for
the sake of misrepresentation, they pretend that they do not know what
we say. Let them hear, therefore, either themselves, or rather those
whom, as inexperienced and unlearned persons, they are striving to
deceive. Our faith--that is, the catholic faith--distinguishes the
righteous from the unrighteous not by the law of works, but by that of
faith, because the just by faith lives. By which distinction it
results that the man who leads his life without murder, without theft,
without false-witness, without coveting other men's goods, giving due
honour to his parents, chaste even to continence from all carnal
intercourse whatever, even conjugal, most liberal in alms-giving, most
patient of injuries; who not only does not deprive another of his
goods, but does not even ask again for what has been taken away from
himself; or who has even sold all his own property and appropriated it
to the poor, and possesses nothing which belongs to him as his
own;--with such a character as this, laudable as it seems to be, if he
has not a true and catholic faith in God, must yet depart from this
life to condemnation. But another, who has good works from a right
faith which worketh by love, maintains his continency in the honesty
of wedlock, although he does not, like the other, well refrain
altogether, but pays and repays the debt of carnal connection, and has
intercourse not only for the sake of offspring, but also for the sake
of pleasure, although only with his wife, which the apostle allows to
those that are married as pardonable;--does not receive injuries with
so much patience, but is raised into anger with the desire of
vengeance, although, in order that he may say, "As we also forgive our
debtors," forgives when he is asked;--possesses personal property,
giving thence indeed some alms, but not as the former so
liberally;--does not take away what belongs to another, but, although
by ecclesiastical, not by civil judgment, yet contends for his own:
certainly this man, who seems so inferior in morals to the former, on
account of the right faith which he has in God, by which he lives, and
according to which in all his wrong-doings he accuses himself, and in
all his good works praises God, giving to himself the shame, to God
the glory, and receiving from Him both forgiveness of sins and love of
right deeds,--shall be delivered for this life, and depart to be
received into the company of those who shall reign with Christ.
Wherefore, if not on account of faith? Which, although without works
it saves no man (for it is not a reprobate faith, since it worketh by
love), yet by it even sins are loosed, because the just by faith
liveth; but without it, even those things which seem good works are
turned into sins: "For everything which is not of faith is sin."
[2734] And it is brought about, on account of this great difference,
that although with no possibility of doubt a persevering integrity of
virginity is preferable to conjugal chastity, yet a woman even twice
married, if she be a catholic, is preferred to a professed virgin that
is a heretic; nor is she in such wise preferred because this one is
better in God's kingdom, but because the other is not there at all.
Now the former, indeed, whom we have described as being of better
morals, if a true faith be his, surpasses the second one, although
both will be in heaven; yet if the faith be wanting to him, he is so
surpassed by him that he himself is not there at all.

Footnotes

[2734] Rom. xiv. 23.

Chapter 15.--The Perfection of Apostles and Prophets.

Since, then, all righteous men, both the more ancient and the
apostles, lived from a right faith which is in Christ Jesus our Lord;
and had with their faith morals so holy, that although they might not
be of such perfect virtue in this life as that which should be after
this life, yet whatever of sin might creep in from human infirmity
might be constantly done away by the piety of their faith itself: it
results from this that, in comparison with the wicked whom God will
condemn, it must be said that these were "righteous," since by their
pious faith they were so far removed into the opposite of those wicked
men that the apostle cries out, "What part hath he that believeth with
an infidel?" [2735] But it is plain that the Pelagians, these modern
heretics, seem to themselves to be religious lovers and praisers of
the saints, since they do not dare to say that they were of an
imperfect virtue; although that elected vessel confesses this, who,
considering in what state he still was, and that the body which is
corrupted drags down the soul, says, "Not that I have already attained
or am yet perfect; brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended."
[2736] And yet a little after, he who had denied himself to be perfect
says, "Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded,"
[2737] in order that he might show that, according to the measure of
this life, there is a certain perfection, and that to that perfection
this also is to be attributed, even although any one may know that he
is not yet perfect. For what is more perfect, or what was more
excellent, than the holy priests among the ancient people? And yet God
prescribed to them to offer sacrifice first of all for their own sins.
And what is more holy among the new people than the apostles? And yet
the Lord prescribed to them to say in their prayer, "Forgive us our
debts." For all the pious, therefore, who lie under this burden of a
corruptible flesh, and groan in the infirmity of this life of theirs,
there is one hope: "We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ
the righteous: and He is the propitiation for our sins." [2738]

Footnotes

Chapter 16 [VI.]--Misrepresentation Concerning Sin in Christ.

They have not a righteous advocate, who are (even if that were the
only difference) distinguished absolutely and widely from the
righteous. Be it far from us to say, as they themselves slanderously
affirm, that this just Advocate "spoke falsely by the necessity of the
flesh;" but we say that He, in the likeness of sinful flesh, in
respect of sin, condemned sin. And they, perchance not understanding
this, and being blinded by the desire of misrepresentation, and
ignorant of the number of ways in which the name of sin is accustomed
to be used in the Holy Scriptures, declare that we affirm sin of
Christ. Therefore we assert that Christ both had no sin,--neither in
soul nor in the body; and that, by taking upon Him flesh in the
likeness of sinful flesh, in respect of sin He condemned sin. And this
assertion, somewhat obscurely made by the apostle, is explained in two
ways,--either that the likenesses of things are accustomed to be
called by the names of those things to which they are like, so that
the apostle may be understood to have intended to call this likeness
of sinful flesh by the name of "sin;" or else that the sacrifices for
sins were under the law called "sins," all which things were figures
of the flesh of Christ, which is the true and only sacrifice for
sins,--not only for those which are all washed away in baptism, but
also for those which afterwards creep in from the weakness of this
life, on account of which the universal Church daily cries in prayer
to God, "Forgive us our debts," and they are forgiven us by means of
that singular sacrifice for sins which the apostle, speaking according
to the law, did not hesitate to call "sin." Whence, moreover, is that
much plainer passage of his, which is not uncertain by any twofold
ambiguity, "We beseech you in Christ's stead to be reconciled to God.
He made Him to be sin for us, who had not known sin; that we might be
the righteousness of God in Him." [2739] For the passage which I have
above mentioned, "In respect of sin, He condemned sin," because it was
not said, "In respect of his sin," may be understood by any one, as if
He said that He condemned sin in respect of the sin of the Jews;
because in respect of their sin who crucified Him, it happened that He
shed His blood for the remission of sins. But this passage, where God
is said to have made Christ Himself "sin," who had not known sin, does
not seem to me to be more fittingly understood than that Christ was
made a sacrifice for sins, and on this account was called "sin."

Footnotes

[2739] 2 Cor. v. 20, 21.

Chapter 17 [VII.]--Their Calumny About the Fulfilment of Precepts in
the Life to Come.

But who can bear their objecting to us, "that we say that after the
resurrection such is to be our progress, that there men can begin to
fulfil the commands of God, which they would not here;" since we say
that there there will be no sin at all, no struggle with any desire of
sin; as if they themselves would dare to deny this? That wisdom also
and the knowledge of God, is then perfected in us, and that in the
Lord there is such rejoicing that it is a full and a true security,
who will deny, unless he is so averse from the truth that on this very
account he cannot attain unto it? But these things will not be in
precepts, but in reward of those precepts which should here be
observed; the neglect of which precepts, indeed, does not lead thither
to the reward. But here the grace of God gives the desire of keeping
His commandments; and if anything in these commandments is less
perfectly observed, He forgives it on account of what we say in
prayer, as well "Thy will be done," as "Forgive us our debts." Here,
then, it is prescribed that we sin not; there, the reward is that we
cannot sin. Here, the precept is that we obey not the desires of sin;
there, the reward that we have no desires of sin. Here, the precept
is, "Understand, ye senseless among the people; and ye fools, be at
some time wise;" [2740] there, the reward is full wisdom and perfect
knowledge. "For we see now through a glass in an enigma," says the
apostle, "but then face to face: now I know in part; but then I shall
know even as also I am known." [2741] Here, the precept is, "Exult
unto the Lord, our helper," [2742] and, "Rejoice, ye righteous, in the
Lord;" [2743] there, the reward is to rejoice with a perfect and
unspeakable joy. Lastly, in the precept it is written, "Blessed are
they which hunger and thirst after righteousness;" but in the reward,
"Because they shall be filled." [2744] Whence, I ask, shall they be
filled, except with what they hunger and thirst after? Who, then, is
so abhorrent, not only from the divine perception, but also from the
human perception, as to say that in man there can be such
righteousness while he is hungering and thirsting for it, as there
will be when he shall be filled with it? But when we are hungering and
thirsting after righteousness, if the faith of Christ is watchful in
us, what is it to be believed that we are hungering and thirsting for,
save Christ? "For He is made unto us wisdom from God, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption; that, as it is
written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." [2745] And
because we only believe on Him not seeing Him, therefore we thirst and
hunger after righteousness. For as long as we are in the body, we
wander from the Lord; for we walk by faith, not by appearance. But
when we shall see Him, and attain certainly to the appearance, we
shall rejoice with joy unspeakable; and then we shall be filled with
righteousness, since now we say to Him with pious longing, "I shall be
satisfied when Thy glory shall be manifested." [2746]

Footnotes

Chapter 18.--Perfection of Righteousness and Full Security Was Not
Even in Paul in This Life.

But how impudent I do not say, but how insane, is the pride which, not
yet being equal to the angels of God, thinks itself already able to
have a righteousness equal to the angels of God; and does not consider
so great and holy a man, who assuredly hungered and thirsted after
that very perfection of righteousness, when he was unwilling to be
lifted up by the greatness of his revelations; and yet that he might
not be lifted up, he was not left to his own choice and will, but
received "the thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to buffet him;
on which account he besought the Lord thrice that it might depart from
him, and the Lord said unto him, My grace is sufficient for thee, for
strength is made perfect in weakness." [2747] What strength, save that
to which it belongs not to be lifted up? And who doubts that this
belongs to righteousness? The angels of God, then, are endowed with
this perfection of righteousness, since they always behold the face of
the Father, and thus of the entire Trinity, because they see through
the Son, in the Holy Spirit. But nothing is more sublime than that
revelation, nor yet does any of the angels in that contemplation of
rejoicing ones find a messenger of Satan needful that he may be
buffeted by him, lest so great a magnitude of revelation should lift
him up. The apostle Paul certainly had not yet that perfection of
virtue, nor yet was he equal to the angels of God; but there was in
him the weakness of lifting himself up, which also had to be checked
by the angel of Satan, lest he should be lifted up by the magnitude of
his revelations. Although, then, the first lifting up cast down Satan,
[2748] yet that greatest Physician, who well knew how to make use of
even evil things, applied from the angel of Satan, against the
mischief of elation, a wholesome, although a painful, medicament, just
as an antidote used to be made even of serpents against the poisons of
serpents. What, then, is the meaning of "My grace is sufficient for
thee," except that you may not by giving way succumb to the buffet of
the messenger of Satan? And what is "Strength is made perfect in
weakness," except that in that place of weakness hitherto, there may
be the perfection of virtue, so that in the very presence of
infirmity, lifting-up may be repressed? Which infirmity assuredly
shall be healed by future immortality. For how is that soundness to be
called perfect where medicine is still needful, even from the buffet
of an angel of Satan?

Footnotes

[2747] 2 Cor. xii. 7.
[2748] [The reference is to the sin of pride, by which Satan himself
fell from the estate of holiness in which he was created.--W.]

Chapter 19.--In What Sense the Righteousness of Man in This Life is
Said to Be Perfect.

From this it results that the virtue which is now in the righteous man
is named perfect up to this point, that to its perfection belong both
the true knowledge and humble confession of even imperfection itself.
For, in respect to this infirmity, that little righteousness of man's
is perfect according to its measure, when it understands even what it
lacks. And therefore the apostle calls himself both perfect and
imperfect, [2749] --imperfect, to wit, in the thought of how much is
wanting to him for the righteousness for the fulness of which he is
still hungering and thirsting; but perfect in that he does not blush
to confess his own imperfection, and goes forward in good that he may
attain. As we can say that the wayfarer is perfect whose approach is
well forwarded, although his intention is not carried out unless his
arrival be actually effected. Therefore, when he had said, "According
to the righteousness which is in the law, I am one who has been
without blame," he immediately added, "What things were gain to me,
those I counted but loss for Christ's sake. Yea, doubtless, and I
count all things to be loss for the sake of the eminent knowledge of
Christ Jesus our Lord: for whose sake I have believed all things not
only to be losses, but I have thought them to be even as dung, that I
might gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own
righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is by the faith of
Christ, the righteousness which is of God in faith." [2750] See! the
apostle does not, of course, say falsely, that "according to the
righteousness which is of the law he was without blame;" and yet those
things which were gain to him, he casts away for Christ's sake, and
thinks them losses, injuries, dung. And not only these things, but all
other things which he mentioned previously; not on account of any kind
of knowledge, but, as he himself says, "the eminent knowledge of
Christ Jesus our Lord," which, beyond a doubt, he had as yet in faith,
but not yet in sight. For then the knowledge of Christ will be
eminent, when He shall be so revealed that what is believed is seen.
Whence, in another place, he thus says, "For ye have died, and your
life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ, your life, shall
appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory." [2751] Hence,
also, the Lord Himself says, "He who loveth me shall be loved of my
Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him." [2752]
Hence John the Evangelist says, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God,
and it has not yet appeared what we shall be: but we know, that when
He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is."
[2753] Then shall the knowledge of Christ be eminent. For now it is,
as it were, hidden away in faith; but it does not yet appear eminent
in sight.

Footnotes

Chapter 20.--Why the Righteousness Which is of the Law is Valued
Slightly by Paul.

Therefore the blessed Paul casts away those past attainments of his
righteousness, as "losses" and "dung," that "he may win Christ and be
found in Him, not having his own righteousness, which is of the law."
Wherefore his own, if it is of the law? For that law is the law of
God. Who has denied this, save Marcion and Manicheus, and such like
pests? Since, then, that is the law of God, he says it is "his own"
righteousness "which is of the law;" and this righteousness of his own
he would not have, but cast it forth as "dung." Why so, except because
it is this which I have above demonstrated, [2754] that those are
under the law who, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and
going about to establish their own, are not subject to the
righteousness of God? [2755] For they think that, by the strength of
their own will, they will fulfil the commands of the law; and wrapped
up in their pride, they are not converted to assisting grace. Thus the
letter killeth [2756] them either openly, as being guilty to
themselves, by not doing what the law commands; or by thinking that
they do it, although they do it not with spiritual love, which is of
God. Thus they remain either plainly wicked or deceitfully
righteous,--manifestly cut off in open unrighteousness, or foolishly
elated in fallacious righteousness. And by this means--marvellous
indeed, but yet true--the righteousness of the law is not fulfilled by
the righteousness which is in the law, or by the law, but by that
which is in the Spirit of grace. Because the righteousness of the law
is fulfilled in those, as it is written, who walk not according to the
flesh, but according to the Spirit. But, according to the
righteousness which is in the law, the apostle says that he was
blameless in the flesh, not in the Spirit; and he says that the
righteousness which is of the law was his, not God's. It must be
understood, therefore, that the righteousness of the law is not
fulfilled according to the righteousness which is in the law or of the
law, that is, according to the righteousness of man, but according to
the righteousness which is in the Spirit of grace, therefore according
to the righteousness of God, that is, which man has from God. Which
may be thus more clearly and briefly stated: That the righteousness of
the law is not fulfilled when the law commands, and man as it were of
his own strength obeys; but when the Spirit aids, and man's free will,
but freed by the grace of God, performs. Therefore the righteousness
of the law is to command what is pleasing to God, to forbid what is
displeasing; but the righteousness in the law is to obey the letter,
and beyond it to seek for no assistance of God for holy living. For
when he had said, "Not having my own righteousness, which is of the
law, but that which is by the faith of Christ," he added, "Which is
from God." That, therefore, is itself the righteousness of God, being
ignorant of which the proud go about to establish their own; for it is
not called the righteousness of God because by it God is righteous,
but because man has it from God.

Footnotes

[2754] See above, ch. 6.
[2755] Rom. x. 3.
[2756] 2 Cor. iii. 6.

Chapter 21.--That Righteousness is Never Perfected in This Life.

Now, according to this righteousness of God, that is, which we have
from God, faith now worketh by love. But it worketh that, in what way
man can attain to Him on whom now, not seeing, he believes; and when
he shall see Him, then that which was in faith through a glass
enigmatically, shall at length be in sight face to face; and then
shall be perfected even love itself. Because it is said with excessive
folly, that God is loved as much before He is seen, as He will be
loved when He is seen. Further, if in this life, as no religious
person doubts, the more we love God, so much the more righteous we
certainly are, who can doubt that pious and true righteousness will
then be perfected when the love of God shall be perfect? Then the law,
therefore, shall be fulfilled; so that nothing at all is wanting to
it, of which law, according to the apostle, the fulfilling is Love.
And thus, when he had said, "Not having my own righteousness, which is
of the law, but that which is by the faith of Jesus Christ, which is
the righteousness from God in faith," he then added, "That I may know
Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His
sufferings." [2757] All these things were not yet full and perfect in
the apostle; but, as if he were placed on the way, he was running
towards their fulness and perfection. For how had he already perfectly
known Christ, who says in another place, "Now I know in part; but then
I shall know even as I am known"? [2758] And how had he already
perfectly known the power of His resurrection, to whom it remained to
know it yet more fully by experience at the time of the resurrection
of the flesh? And how had he perfectly known already the fellowship of
His suffering, if he had not yet experienced for him the suffering of
death? Finally, he adds and says, "If in any manner I may attain unto
the resurrection of the dead." [2759] And then he says, "Not that I
have already received or am already perfected." What, then, does he
confess that he has not yet received, and in what is he not yet
perfected, except that righteousness which is of God, which he
desired, not willing to have his own righteousness, which is of the
law? For hence he was speaking, and such was the reason for his saying
these things in resistance to the enemies of the grace of God, for the
bestowal of which Christ was crucified; and of the race of whom are
also these.

Footnotes

Chapter 22.--Nature of Human Righteousness and Perfection.

For from the place in which he undertook to say these things, he thus
began, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the
concision. For we are the circumcision, who serve God in the
Spirit,"--or, as some codices have it, "who serve God the Spirit," or
"the Spirit of God,"--"and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no
confidence in the flesh." [2760] Here it is manifest that he is
speaking against the Jews, who, observing the law carnally, and going
about to establish their own righteousness, were slain by the letter,
and not made alive by the Spirit, and gloried in themselves while the
apostles and all the children of the promise were glorying in Christ.
Then he added, "Although I may have confidence in the flesh. If any
one else thinks that he has confidence in the flesh, I more." [2761]
And enumerating all things which have glory according to the flesh, he
ended at that point where he says, "According to the righteousness
which is in the law, blameless." And when he had said that he regarded
all these things as altogether loss and disadvantage and dung that he
might gain Christ, he added the passage which I am treating, "And be
found in Him, not having my own righteousness, but that which is by
the faith of Christ, which is from God." He confessed that he had not
yet received the perfection of this righteousness, which will not be
except in that excellent knowledge of Christ, on account of which he
said that all things were loss to him; and he confessed, therefore,
that he was not yet perfect. "But I follow on," said he, "if I may
apprehend that in which I also am apprehended of Christ Jesus." [2762]
"I may apprehend that in which I also am apprehended," is much the
same as, "I may know, even as I also am known." "Brethren," says he,
"I count not myself to have apprehended: but one thing, forgetting
those things which are behind, and reaching forward to those which are
before, I follow on according to the purpose for the reward of the
supreme calling of God in Christ Jesus." [2763] The order of the words
is, "But one thing I follow." Of which one thing the Lord also is well
understood to have admonished Martha, where he says, "Martha, Martha,
thou art careful and troubled about many things: but one thing is
needful." [2764] The apostle, wishing to apprehend this as if set in
the way, said that he followed on to the reward of the high calling of
God in Christ Jesus. For who can delay when he would apprehend that
which he declares that he is following, that he shall then have a
righteousness equal to the righteousness of the holy angels, none of
whom, of course, does any messenger of Satan buffet lest he should be
lifted up with the greatness of his revelations? Then, admonishing
those who might think themselves already perfect with the fulness of
that righteousness, he says, "Let as many of us, therefore, as are
perfect, be thus minded." [2765] As if he should say, If, according to
the capacity of mortal man for the little measure of this life, we are
perfect, let us understand that it also belongs to that perfection
that we perceive that we are not yet perfected in that angelical
righteousness which we shall have in the manifestation of Christ. "And
if in anything," he said, "ye be otherwise minded, God shall also
reveal even this unto you." [2766] How, save to those that are walking
and advancing in the way of the faith, until that wandering be
finished and they come to the actual vision? Whence following on, he
added, "Nevertheless, whereunto we have already attained, let us walk
therein." [2767] Then he concludes that they should be bewared of,
concerning whom this passage treated at its beginning. "Brethren, be
imitators of me, and mark them which so walk as ye have our example.
For many walk, of whom I have spoken often, and now tell you even
weeping, whose end is destruction," [2768] and the rest. These are the
very ones of whom, in the beginning, he had said, "Beware of dogs,
beware of evil workers," and what follows. Therefore all are enemies
of the cross of Christ who, going about to establish their own
righteousness, which is of the law,--that is, where only the letter
commands, and the Spirit does not fulfil,--are not subject to the law
of God. For if they who are of the law be heirs, faith is made an
empty thing. "If righteousness is by the law, then Christ has died in
vain: then is the offence of the cross done away." And thus those are
enemies of the cross of Christ who say that righteousness is by the
law, to which it belongs to command, not to assist. But the grace of
God through Jesus Christ the Lord in the Holy Spirit helpeth our
infirmity.

Footnotes

Chapter 23.--There is No True Righteousness Without the Faith of the
Grace of Christ.

Wherefore he who lives according to the righteousness which is in the
law, without the faith of the grace of Christ, as the apostle declares
that he lived blameless, must be accounted to have no true
righteousness; not because the law is not true and holy, but because
to wish to obey the letter which commands, without the Spirit of God
which quickens, as if of the strength of free will, is not true
righteousness. But the righteousness according to which the righteous
man lives by faith, since man has it from God by the Spirit of grace,
is true righteousness. And although this is not undeservedly said to
be perfect in some righteous men, according to the capacity of this
life, yet it is but little to that great righteousness which the
equality of the angels receives. And he who had not yet possessed
this, on the one hand, in respect of that which was already in him,
said that he was perfect; and in respect of that which was still
wanting to him, said that he was imperfect. But manifestly that lower
degree of righteousness makes merit, that higher kind becomes reward.
Whence he who does not strive after the former does not attain unto
the latter. Wherefore, after the resurrection of man, to deny that
there will be a fulness of righteousness, and to think that the
righteousness in the body of that life will be such as it can be in
the body of this death, is singular folly. But it is most true that
men do not there begin to fulfil those commands of God which here they
have been unwilling to obey. For there will be the fulness of the most
perfect righteousness, yet not of men striving after what is
commanded, and making gradual endeavours after that fulness; but in
the twinkling of an eye, even as shall be that resurrection of the
dead itself, because that greatness of perfect righteousness will be
given as a reward to those who here have obeyed the commandments, and
will not itself be commanded to them as a thing to be accomplished.
But I should in such wise say they have done the commandments, that we
might remember that to these very commandments belongs the prayer in
which the holy children of promise daily say with truth, "Thy will be
done," [2769] and "Forgive us our debts." [2770]

Footnotes

[2769] Matt. vi. 10.
[2770] Matt. vi. 12.

Chapter 24 [VIII.]--There are Three Principal Heads in the Pelagian
Heresy.

When, then, the Pelagians are pressed with these and such like
testimonies and words of truth, not to deny original sin; not to say
that the grace of God whereby we are justified is not given freely,
but according to our merits; nor to say that in mortal man, however
holy and well doing, there is so great righteousness that even after
the washing of regeneration, until he finishes this life of his,
forgiveness of sins is not necessary to him,--therefore when they are
pressed not to make these three assertions, and by their means
alienate men who believe them from the grace of the Saviour, and
persuade the lifted-up unto pride to go headlong unto the judgment of
the devil: they introduce the clouds of other questions in which their
impiety--in the sight of men more simpleminded, whether that they are
more slow or less instructed in the sacred writings--may be concealed.
These are the misty questions of the praise of the creature, of the
praise of marriage, of the praise of the law, of the praise of free
will, of the praise of the saints; as if any one of our people were in
the habit of disparaging those things, and not rather of announcing
all things with due praises to the honour of the Creator and Saviour.
But even the creature does not desire in such wise to be praised as to
be unwilling to be healed. And the more marriage is to be praised, the
less is to be attributed to it the shameful concupiscence of the
flesh, which is not of the Father, but of the world; and which
assuredly marriage found and did not make in men; because, moreover,
it is actually in very many without marriage, and if nobody had sinned
marriage itself might be without it. And the law, holy and just and
good, is neither grace itself, nor is anything rightly done by it
without grace; because the law is not given that it may give life, but
it was added because of transgression, that it might conclude all
persons convicted under sin, and that the promise by faith of Jesus
Christ might be given to them that believe. [2771] And the free will
taken captive does not avail, except for sin; but for righteousness,
unless divinely set free and aided, it does not avail. And thus, also,
all the saints, whether from that ancient Abel to John the Baptist, or
from the apostles themselves up to this time, and henceforth even to
the end of the world, are to be praised in the Lord, not in
themselves. Because the voice, even of those earlier ones, is, "In the
Lord shall my soul be praised." [2772] And the voice of the later ones
is, "By the grace of God I am what I am." [2773] And to all belongs,
"That he that glorieth may glory in the Lord." And it is the common
confession of all, "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive
ourselves, and the truth is not in us." [2774]

Footnotes

Chapter 25 [IX.]--He Shows that the Opinion of the Catholics is the
Mean Between that of the Manicheans and Pelagians, and Refutes Both.

But since, in these five particulars which I have set forth, in which
they seek lurking-places, and from which they weave
misrepresentations, they are forsaken and convicted by the divine
writings, they have thought to deter those whom they could by the
hateful name of Manicheans, lest in opposition to their most perverse
teachings their ears should be conformed to the truth; because
doubtless the Manicheans blasphemously condemn the three former of
those five dogmas, saying that neither the human creature, nor
marriage, nor the law was ordained by the supreme and true God. But
they do not receive what the truth says, that sin took its origin from
free will, and that all evil, whether of angel or man, comes from it;
because they prefer to believe, in their turning aside from God, that
the nature of evil was always evil, and co-eternal with God. They,
moreover, attack the holy patriarchs and prophets with as many
execrations as they can. This is the way in which the modern heretics
think, that by objecting the name of Manicheans, they evade the force
of truth. But they do not evade it; because it follows them up, and
overturns at once Manicheans and Pelagians. For in that when a man is
born there is something good, so far as he is a man, he condemns the
Manichean, and praises the Creator; but in so far as he derives
original sin, he condemns the Pelagian, and holds a Saviour necessary.
For even because that nature is said to be healable, it repels both
teachings; because it would not, on the one hand, have need of
medicine if it were sound, which is opposed to the Pelagian, nor could
it be healed at all if the evil in it were eternal and immutable,
which is opposed to the Manichean. Moreover, in that to marriage,
which we praise as ordained of God, we do not say that the
concupiscence of the flesh is to be attributed, this is both contrary
to the Pelagians, who make this concupiscence itself a matter of
praise, and contrary to the Manicheans, who attribute it to a foreign
and evil nature, when it really is an evil accidental to our nature,
not to be separated by the disjunction from God, but to be healed by
the mercy of God. Moreover, in that we say that the law, holy and just
and good, was given not for the justification of the wicked, but for
the conviction of the proud, for the sake of transgressions,--this is,
on the one hand, opposed to the Manicheans, in that according to the
apostle the law is praised; and on the other opposed to the Pelagians,
in that, in accordance with the apostle, no one is justified by the
law; and therefore, for the sake of making alive those whom the letter
has killed, that is, whom the law, enjoining good, makes guilty by
transgressions, the Spirit of grace freely brings aid. Also in that we
say that the will is free in evil, but for doing good it must be made
free by God's grace, this is opposed to the Pelagians; but in that we
say it originated from that which previously was not evil, this is
opposed to the Manicheans. Again, that we honour the holy patriarchs
and prophets with praises due to them in God, is in opposition to the
Manicheans; but that we say that even to them, however righteous and
pleasing to God they might have been, the propitiation of the Lord was
necessary, this is in opposition to the Pelagians. The catholic faith,
therefore, finds them both, as it does also other heretics, in
opposition to it, and convicts both by the authority of the divine
testimonies and by the light of truth.

Chapter 26 [X.]--The Pelagians Still Strive After a Hiding-Place, by
Introducing the Needless Question of the Origin of the Soul.

The Pelagians, indeed, add to the clouds which envelop their
lurking-places the unnecessary question concerning the origin of the
soul, for the purpose of erecting a hiding-place by disturbing
manifest things by the obscurity of other matters. For they say "that
we guard the continuous propagation of souls with the continuous
propagation of sin." And where and when they have read this, either in
the addresses or in the writings of those who maintain the catholic
faith against this, I do not know; because, although I find something
written by catholics on the subject, yet the defence of the truth had
not yet been undertaken against those men, neither was there any
anxiety to answer them. But this I say, that according to the Holy
Scriptures original sin is so manifest, and that this is put away in
infants by the laver of regeneration is confirmed by such antiquity
and authority of the catholic faith, notorious by such a clear
concurrent testimony of the Church, that what is argued by the inquiry
or affirmation of anybody concerning the origin of the soul, if it is
contrary to this, cannot be true. Wherefore, whoever builds up, either
concerning the soul or any other obscure matter, any edifice whence he
may destroy this, which is true, best founded, and best known, whether
he is a son or an enemy of the Church, must either be corrected or
avoided. But let this be the end of this Book, that the things which
follow may have another beginning.
.

Book IV.

After having set aside in the former books the calumnies hurled
against the Catholics, Augustin here proceeds to open up the snares
which lie hidden in the remaining part of the second epistle of the
Pelagians, in the five heads of their doctrine--in the praise, to wit,
of the creature, the praise of marriage, the praise of the law, the
praise of free will, and the praise of the saints; in connection with
which heads the Pelagians malignantly boast that they are at issue not
more with the Manicheans than with the Catholics. Hence these five
points may bring us back to this, that they put forward their
threefold error--namely, the two first, the denial of original sin;
the two following, the assertion that grace is given according to
merits; the fifth, their statement that the saints had not sinned in
this life. Augustin shows that both heresies, that of the Manicheans
and that of the Pelagians, are opposed and equally odious to the
Catholic faith, whereby we profess, first, that the nature created by
a good God was good, but that, nevertheless, it is in need of a
Saviour because of original sin, which passed into all men from the
transgression of the first man: then secondly, that marriage is good,
truly instituted by God, but that that concupiscence is evil which was
associated with marriage by sin: also thirdly that the law of God is
good, but in such wise as only to manifest sin, not to take it away:
that fourthly free will is assuredly inherent in the nature of man,
but that now, however, it is so enslaved that it does not avail to the
doing of righteousness, unless when it shall have been made free by
grace: but that fifthly the saints, whether of the Old or New
Testament, were indeed endued with a righteousness, which was true but
not perfect, nor so full that they should be free from all sin. In
conclusion, he brings forward the testimonies of Cyprian and Ambrose
on behalf of the Catholic faith, some concerning original sin, others
about the assistance of grace, and the last concerning the
imperfection of present righteousness.

Chapter 1 [I.]--The Subterfuges of the Pelagians are Five.

After the matters which I have considered, and to which I have
answered, they repeat the same things as those contained in the letter
which I have refuted, but in a different manner. For before, they put
them forward as objecting to us things which we think as it were
falsely; but afterwards, as explaining what they themselves think,
they have presented the same things from the opposite side, adding two
certain points which they had not mentioned--that is, "that they say
that baptism is necessary for all ages," and "that by Adam death
passed upon us, not sins," which things must also themselves be
considered in their own place. Hence, because in the former Book which
I have just finished I said that they alleged hindrances of five
matters in which lurk their dogmas hostile to God's grace and to the
catholic faith,--the praise, to wit, of the creature, the praise of
marriage, the praise of the law, the praise of free will, the praise
of the saints,--I think it is more convenient to make a general
discrimination of all that they maintain, the contrary of which they
object to us, and to show which of those things pertain to any of
those five, that so my answer may be by that very distinction clearer
and briefer.

Chapter 2 [II.]--The Praise of the Creature.

They accomplish the praise of the creature, inasmuch as it pertains to
the human race of which the question now is, in these statements:
"That God is the Maker of all those that are born, and that the sons
of men are God's work; and that all sin descends not from nature, but
from the will." With this praise of the creature they connect, "that
they say that baptism is necessary for every age, so that," namely,
"the creature itself may be adopted among the children of God; not
because it derives anything from its parents which must be purified in
the laver of regeneration." To this praise they add also, "that they
say that Christ the Lord was sprinkled with no stain of sin as far as
pertains to His infancy;" because they assert that His flesh was most
pure from all contagion of sin, not by His own excellence and singular
grace, but by His fellowship with the nature which is shared by all
infants. It also belongs to this that they introduce the question "of
the origin of the soul," thus endeavouring to make all the souls of
infants equal to the soul of Christ, maintaining that they likewise
are sprinkled with no stain of sin. On this account, also, they say,
"that nothing of evil passed from Adam upon the rest of humanity
except death, which," they say, "is not always an evil, since to the
martyrs, for instance, it is for the sake of rewards; and it is not
the dissolution of the bodies, which in every kind of men shall be
raised up, that can make death to be called either good or evil, but
the diversity of merits which arises from human liberty." These things
they write in this letter concerning the praise of the creature.
They praise marriage truly according to the Scriptures, "because the
Lord saith in the gospel, He who made men from the beginning made them
male and female, and said, Increase and multiply, and replenish the
earth." Although this is not written in that passage of the gospel,
yet it is written in the law. They add, moreover, "What therefore God
hath joined together, let not man put asunder." [2775] And these we
acknowledge to be gospel words.
In the praise of the law they say, "that the old law was, according to
the apostle, holy and just and good; that on those who keep its
commandments, and live righteously by faith, such as the prophets and
patriarchs, and all the saints, life eternal could be conferred."
In the praise of free will they say, "that free will has not perished,
since the Lord says by the prophets, `If ye be willing and will hear
me, ye shall eat the good things of the land: if ye are unwilling, and
will not hear, the sword shall devour you.' [2776] And thus, also, it
is that grace assists the good purpose of any person, but yet does not
infuse a desire of virtue into the reluctant heart, because there is
no acceptance of persons with God."
In the praise of the saints they conceal themselves, saying "that
baptism perfectly renews men, inasmuch as the apostle is a witness who
testifies that, by the washing of water, the Church is made out of the
heathen holy and spotless; [2777] that the Holy Spirit also assisted
pious souls in ancient times, even as the prophet says to God, `Thy
good Spirit shall lead me into the right way;' [2778] that all the
prophets, moreover, and apostles or saints, as well of the New as of
the Old Testament, to whom God gives witness, were righteous, not in
comparison with the wicked, but by the rule of virtue; and that in
future time there is a reward as well of good works as of evil. But
that no one can then perform the commandment which here he may have
contemned, because the apostle said, `We must be manifested before the
judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things
belonging to the body, according to what he has done, whether good or
evil.'" [2779]
In all these points, whatever they say of the praise of the creature
and of marriage, they endeavour to bring us back to this,--that there
is no original sin; whatever of the praise of law and of free will, to
this, that grace does not assist without merit, and that thus grace is
no more grace; whatever of the praise of the saints, to this, that
mortal life in the saints appears not to have sin, and that it is not
necessary for them to pray God for the remitting of their debts.

Footnotes

Chapter 3 [III.]--The Catholics Praise Nature, Marriage, Law, Free
Will, and the Saints, in Such Wise as to Condemn as Well Pelagians as
Manicheans.

Let every one who, with a catholic mind, shudders at these impious and
damnable doctrines, in this tripartite division, shun the
lurking-places and snares of this fivefold error, and be so careful
between one and another as in such wise to decline from the Manicheans
as not to incline to the Pelagians; and again, so to separate himself
from the Pelagians as not to associate himself with the Manicheans;
or, if he should already be taken hold of in one or the other bondage,
that he should not so pluck himself out of the hands of either as to
rush into those of the other. Because they seem to be contrary to one
another; since the Manicheans manifest themselves by vituperating
these five points, and the Pelagians conceal themselves by praising
them. Wherefore he condemns and shuns both, whoever he may be, who
according to the rule of the catholic faith so glorifies the Creator
in men, that are born of the good creature of flesh and soul (for this
the Manichean will not have), as that he yet confesses that on account
of the corruption which has passed over into them by the sin of the
first man, even infants need a Saviour (for this the Pelagian will not
have). He who so distinguishes the evil of shameful concupiscence from
the blessing of marriage, as neither, like the Manicheans, to reproach
the source of our birth, nor, like the Pelagians, to praise the source
of our disorder. He who so maintains the law to have been given holy
and just and good through Moses by a holy and just and good God (which
Manicheus, in opposition to the apostle, denies), as to say that it
both shows forth sin and yet does not take it away, and commands
righteousness which yet it does not give (which, again, in opposition
to the apostle, Pelagius denies). He who so asserts free will as to
say that the evil of both angel and man began, not from I know not
what nature always evil, which is no nature, but from the will itself,
which overturns Manichean heresy, and nevertheless that even thus the
captive will cannot breathe into a wholesome liberty save by God's
grace, which overturns the Pelagian heresy. He who so praises in God
the holy men of God, not only after Christ manifested in the flesh and
subsequently, but even those of the former times, whom the Manicheans
dare to blaspheme, as yet to believe their own confessions concerning
themselves, more than the lies of the Pelagians. For the word of the
saints is, "If we should say that we have no sin, we deceive
ourselves, and the truth is not in us." [2780]

Footnotes

[2780] 1 John i. 8.

Chapter 4 [IV.]--Pelagians and Manicheans on the Praise of the
Creature.

These things being so, what advantage is it to new heretics, enemies
of the cross of Christ and opposers of divine grace, that they seem
sound from the error of the Manicheans, if they are dying by another
pestilence of their own? What advantage is it to them, that in the
praise of the creature they say "that the good God is the maker of
those that are born, by whom all things were made, and that the
children of men are His work," whom the Manicheans say are the work of
the prince of darkness; when between them both, or among them both,
God's creation, which is in infants, is perishing? For both of them
refuse to have it delivered by Christ's flesh and blood,--the one,
because they destroy that very flesh and blood, as if He did not take
upon Him these at all in man or of man; and the other, because they
assert that there is no evil in infants from which they should be
delivered by the sacrament of this flesh and blood. Between them lies
the human creature in infants, with a good origination, with a
corrupted propagation, confessing for its goods a most excellent
Creator, seeking for its evils a most merciful Redeemer, having the
Manicheans as disparagers of its benefits, having the Pelagians as
deniers of its evils, and both as persecutors. And although in infancy
there is no power to speak, yet with its silent look and its hidden
weakness it addresses the impious vanity of both, saying to the one,
"Believe that I am created by Him who creates good things;" and saying
to the other, "Suffer me to be healed by Him who created me." The
Manicheans say, "There is nothing of this infant save the good soul to
be delivered; the rest," which belongs not to the good God, but to the
prince of darkness, "is to be rejected." The Pelagians say, "Certainly
there is nothing of this infant to be delivered, because we have shown
the whole to be safe." Both lie; but now the accuser of the flesh
alone is more bearable than the praiser, who is convicted of cruelty
against the whole. But neither does the Manichean help the human soul
by blaspheming God, the Author of the entire man; nor does the
Pelagian permit the divine grace to come to the help of human infancy
by denying original sin. Therefore it is by the catholic faith that
God has mercy, seeing that by condemning both mischievous doctrines it
comes to the help of the infant for salvation. It says to the
Manicheans, "Hear the apostle crying, `Know ye not that your body is
the temple of the Holy Ghost in you?' [2781] and believe that the good
God is the Creator of bodies, because the temple of the Holy Ghost
cannot be the work of the prince of darkness." It says to the
Pelagians, "The infant that you look upon `was conceived in iniquity,
and in sin its mother nourished it in the womb.' [2782] Why, as if in
defending it as free from all mischief, do you not permit it to be
delivered by mercy? No one is pure from uncleanness, not even the
infant whose life is of one day upon the earth. [2783] Allow the
wretched creatures to receive remission of sins, through Him who alone
neither as small nor great could have any sin."

Footnotes

Chapter 5.--What is the Special Advantage in the Pelagian Opinions?

What advantage, then, is it to them that they say "that all sin
descends not from nature, but from the will," and resist by the truth
of this judgment the Manicheans, who say that evil nature is the cause
of sin; when by being unwilling to admit original sin although itself
also descends from the will of the first man, they make infants to
depart in guilt from the body? What advantage is it to them "that they
confess that baptism is necessary for all ages," while the Manicheans
say that it is superfluous for every age, while they say that in
infants it is false so far as it pertains to the forgiveness of sins?
What advantage is it to them that they maintain "the flesh of Christ"
(which the Manicheans contend was either no flesh at all, or a feigned
flesh) to have been not only the true flesh, but also "that the soul
itself was stained by no spot of sin," when other infants are by them
so put on the same level with His infancy, with not unequal purity, as
that both that flesh does not appear to keep its own holiness in
comparison with these, and these obtain no salvation from that?

Chapter 6.--Not Death Alone, But Sin Also Has Passed into Us by Means
of Adam.

In that particular, indeed, wherein they say "that death passed to us
by Adam, not sins," they have not the Manicheans as their adversaries:
since they, too, deny that original sin from the first man, at first
of pure and upright body and spirit, and afterwards depraved by free
will, subsequently passed and passes as sin into all with death; but
they say that the flesh was evil from the beginning, and was created
by an evil spirit and along with an evil spirit; but that a good
soul--a portion, to wit, of God--for the deserts of its defilement by
food and drink, in which it was before bound up, came into man, and
thus by means of copulation was bound in the chain of the flesh. And
thus the Manicheans agree with the Pelagians that it was not the guilt
of the first man that passed into the human race--neither by the
flesh, which they say was never good; nor by the soul, which they
assert comes into the flesh of man with the merits of its own
defilements with which it was polluted before the flesh. But how do
the Pelagians say "that only death passed upon us by Adam's means"?
For if we die because he died, but he died because be sinned, they say
that the punishment passed without the guilt, and that innocent
infants are punished with an unjust penalty by deriving death without
the deserts of death. This, the catholic faith has known of the one
and only mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who
condescended to undergo death--that is, the penalty of sin--without
sin, for us. As He alone became the Son of man, in order that we might
become through Him sons of God, so He alone, on our behalf, undertook
punishment without ill deservings, that we through Him might obtain
grace without good deservings. Because as to us nothing good was due
so to Him nothing bad was due. Therefore, commending His love to them
to whom He was about to give undeserved life, He was willing to suffer
for them an undeserved death. This special prerogative of the Mediator
the Pelagians endeavour to make void, so that this should no longer be
special in the Lord, if Adam in such wise suffered a death due to him
on account of his guilt, as that infants, drawing from him no guilt,
should suffer undeserved death. For although very much good is
conferred on the good by means of death, whence some have fitly argued
even "of the benefit of death;" yet from this what can be declared
except the mercy of God, since the punishment of sin is converted into
beneficent uses?

Chapter 7.--What is the Meaning of "In Whom All Have Sinned"?

But these speak thus who wish to wrest men from the apostle's words
into their own thought. For where the apostle says, "By one man sin
entered into the world, and death by sin, and so passed upon all men,"
[2784] they will have it there understood not that "sin" passed over,
but "death." What, then, is the meaning of what follows, "Whereto all
have sinned"? For either the apostle says that in that "one man" all
have sinned of whom he had said, "By one man sin entered into the
world," or else in that "sin," or certainly in "death." For it need
not disturb us that he said not "in which" [using the feminine form of
the pronoun], but "in whom" [using the masculine] all have sinned;
since "death" in the Greek language is of the masculine gender. Let
them, then, choose which they will,--for either in that "man" all have
sinned, and it is so said because when he sinned all were in him; or
in that "sin" all have sinned, because that was the doing of all in
general which all those who were born would have to derive; or it
remains for them to say that in that "death" all sinned. But in what
way this can be understood, I do not clearly see. For all die in the
sin; they do not sin in the death; for when sin precedes, death
follows--not when death precedes, sin follows. Because sin is the
sting of death--that is, the sting by whose stroke death occurs, not
the sting with which death strikes. [2785] Just as poison, if it is
drunk, is called the cup of death, because by that cup death is
caused, not because the cup is caused by the death, or is given by
death. But if "sin" cannot be understood by those words of the apostle
as being that "wherein all have sinned," because in Greek, from which
the Epistle is translated, "sin" is expressed in the feminine gender,
it remains that all men are understood to have sinned in that first
"man," because all men were in him when he sinned; and from him sin is
derived by birth, and is not remitted save by being born again. For
thus also the sainted Hilary understood what is written, "wherein all
have sinned;" for he says, "wherein," that is, in Adam, "all have
sinned." [2786] Then he adds, "It is manifest that all have sinned in
Adam, as it were in the mass; for he himself was corrupted by sin, and
all whom he begot were born under sin." When he wrote this, Hilary,
without any ambiguity, indicated how we should understand the words,
"wherein all have sinned."

Footnotes

[2784] Rom. v. 12.
[2785] [This is a distinction as to the kind of genitive involved in
the phrase "sting of death." Augustin says "of death" is genitive of
the object, not of the author or subject.--W.]
[2786] Commentaries by Hilary the Deacon, printed among the Works of
Ambrose, vol. iv. (Patrol. Lat. xvii.)

Chapter 8.--Death Passed Upon All by Sin.

But on account of what does the same apostle say, that we are
reconciled to God by Christ, except on account of what we had become
enemies? And what is this but sin? Whence also the prophet says, "Your
sins separate between you and God." [2787] On account of this
separation, therefore, the Mediator was sent, that He might take away
the sin of the world, by which we were separated as enemies, and that
we, being reconciled, might be made from enemies children. About this,
certainly, the apostle was speaking; hence it happened that he
interposed what he says, "That sin entered by one man." For these are
his former words. He says, "But God commendeth His love towards us in
that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more, then,
being now justified in His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through
Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the
death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved in
His life. And not only so, but glorying also in God through Jesus
Christ our Lord, by whom also we have now received reconciliation."
Then he subjoins, "Therefore, as by one man sin entered into this
world, and death by sin, and so passed upon all men, for in him all
have sinned." [2788] Why do the Pelagians evade this matter? If
reconciliation through Christ is necessary to all men, on all men has
passed sin by which we have become enemies, in order that we should
have need of reconciliation. This reconciliation is in the laver of
regeneration and in the flesh and blood of Christ, without which not
even infants can have life in themselves. For as there was one man for
death on account of sin, so there is one man for life on account of
righteousness; because "as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall
all be made alive;" [2789] and "as by the sin of one upon all men to
condemnation, so also by the righteousness of one upon all men unto
justification of life." [2790] Who is there that has turned a deaf ear
to these apostolical words with such hardiness of wicked impiety, as,
having heard them, to contend that death passed upon us through Adam
without sin, unless, indeed, they are opposers of the grace of God and
enemies of the cross of Christ?--whose end is destruction if they
continue in this obstinacy. But let it suffice to have said thus much
for the sake of that serpentine subtlety of theirs, by which they wish
to corrupt simple minds, and to turn them away from the simplicity of
the faith, as if by the praise of the creature.

Footnotes

Chapter 9 [V.]--Of the Praise of Marriage.

But further, concerning the praise of marriage, [2791] what advantage
is it to them that, in opposition to the Manicheans, who assign
marriage not to the true and good God, but to the prince of darkness,
these men resist the words of true piety, and say, "That the Lord
speaks in the gospel, saying, Who from the beginning made them male
and female, and said, Increase and multiply and replenish the earth.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder"?
[2792] What does this profit them, by means of the truth to seduce to
a falsehood? For they say this in order that infants may be thought to
be born free from all fault, and thus that there is no need of their
being reconciled to God through Christ, since they have no original
sin, on account of which reconciliation is necessary to all by means
of one who came into the world without sin, just as the enmities of
all were caused by means of one through whom sin entered into the
world. And this is believed by catholics for the sake of the salvation
of the nature of men, without detracting from the praise of marriage;
because the praise of marriage is a righteous intercourse of the
sexes, not a wicked defence of vices. And thus, when, by their praise
of marriage, these persons wish to draw over men from the Manicheans
to themselves, they desire merely to change their disease, not to heal
it.

Footnotes

[2791] See On Original Sin, ch. 38.
[2792] Matt. xix. 4, etc.

Chapter 10.--Of the Praise of the Law.

Once more, in the praise of the law, what advantage is it to them
that, in opposition to the Manicheans, they say the truth when they
wish to bring men from that view to this which they hold falsely
against the catholics? For they say, "We confess that even the old
law, according to the apostle, is holy and just and good, and that
this could confer eternal life on those that kept its commandments,
and lived righteously by faith, like the prophets and patriarchs, and
all the saints." By which words, very craftily expressed, they praise
the law in opposition to grace; for certainly that law, although just
and holy and good, could not confer eternal life on all those men of
God, but the faith which is in Christ. For this faith worketh by love,
not according to the letter which killeth, but according to the Spirit
which maketh alive, to which grace of God the law, as it were a
schoolmaster, leads by deterring from transgression, that so that
might be conferred upon man which it could not itself confer. For to
those words of theirs in which they say "that the law was able to
confer eternal life on the prophets and patriarchs, and all saints who
kept its commandments," the apostle replies, "If righteousness be by
the law, then has Christ died in vain." [2793] "If the inheritance be
by the law, then is it no more of promise." [2794] "If they which are
of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of
none effect." [2795] "But that no man is justified by the law in the
sight of God, is evident: for, The just by faith liveth." [2796] "But
the law is not of faith: but The man that doeth them shall live in
them." [2797] Which testimony, quoted by the apostle from the law, is
understood in respect of temporal life, in respect of the fear of
losing which, men were in the habit of doing the works of the law, not
of faith; because the transgressors of the law were commanded by the
same law to be put to death by the people. Or, if it must be
understood more highly, that "He who doeth these things shall live in
them" was written in reference to eternal life; the power of the law
is so expressed that the weakness of man in himself, itself failing to
do what the law commands, might seek help from the grace of God rather
of faith, seeing that by His mercy even faith itself is bestowed.
Because faith is thus possessed, according as God has given to every
one the measure of faith. [2798] For if men have it not of themselves,
but men receive the Spirit of power and of love and of continence,
whence that very same teacher of the Gentiles says, "For we have not
received the spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of
continence," [2799] --assuredly also the Spirit of faith is received,
of which he says, "Having also the same Spirit of faith." [2800]
Truly, then, says the law, "He who doeth these things shall live in
them." But in order to do these things, and live in them, there is
necessary not law which ordains this, but faith which obtains this.
Which faith, however, that it may deserve to receive these things, is
itself given freely.

Footnotes

Chapter 11.--The Pelagians Understand that the Law Itself is God's
Grace.

But those enemies of grace never endeavour to lay more secret snares
for more vehement opposition to that same grace than when they praise
the law, which, without doubt, is worthy to be praised. [2801]
Because, by their different modes of speaking, and by variety of words
in all their arguments, they wish the law to be understood as
"grace"--that, to wit, we may have from the Lord God the help of
knowledge, whereby we may know those things which have to be
done,--not the inspiration of love, that, when known, we may do them
with a holy love, which is properly grace. For the knowledge of the
law without love puffeth up, does not edify, according to the same
apostle, who most openly says, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love
edifieth." [2802] Which saying is like to that in which it is said,
"The letter killeth, the spirit maketh alive." [2803] For "Knowledge
puffeth up," corresponds to "The letter killeth:" and, "Love
edifieth," to "The spirit maketh alive;" because "the love of God is
shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us."
[2804] Therefore the knowledge of the law makes a proud transgressor;
but, by the gift of charity, he delights to be a doer of the law. We
do not then make void the law through faith, but we establish the law,
[2805] which by terrifying leads to faith. Thus certainly the law
worketh wrath, that the mercy of God may bestow grace on the sinner,
frightened and turned to the fulfilment of the righteousness of the
law through Jesus Christ our Lord, who is that wisdom of God of which
it is written, "She carries law and mercy on her tongue," [2806] --law
whereby she frightens, mercy by which she may help,--law by His
servant, mercy by Himself,--the law, as it were, in the staff which
Elisha [2807] sent to raise up the son of the widow, and it failed to
raise him up, "For if a law had been given which could have given
life, righteousness would altogether have been by the law," [2808] but
mercy, as it were, in Elisha himself, who, wearing the figure of
Christ, by giving life to the dead was joined in the signification of
the great sacrament, as it were, of the New Testament.

Chapter 12 [VI.]--Of the Praise of Free Will.

Moreover, that, in opposition to the Manicheans, they praise free
will, making use of the prophetic testimony, "If ye shall be willing
and will hear me, ye shall eat what is good in the land; but if ye
shall be unwilling and will not hear me, the sword shall consume you:"
[2809] what advantage is this to them, when, indeed, it is not so much
against the Manicheans that they are maintaining, as against the
catholics that they are extolling, free will? For they wish what is
said, "If ye be willing and will hear me," to be so understood, as if
in the preceding will itself were the merit of the grace that follows;
and thus grace were no more grace, seeing that it is not free when it
is rendered as a debt. But if they should so understand what is
written, "If ye be willing," as to confess that He prepares even that
good will itself of whom it is written, "The will is prepared by the
Lord," [2810] they would use this testimony as catholics, and not only
would overcome the ancient heresy of the Manicheans, but would not
found the new one of the Pelagians.

Footnotes

[2809] Isa. i. 19, 20.
[2810] Prov. viii. 35.

Chapter 13.--God's Purposes are Effects of Grace.

What does it profit them, that in the praise of that same free will
"they say that grace assists the good purpose of every one"? [2811]
This would be received without scruple as being said in a catholic
spirit, if they did not attribute merit to the good purpose, to which
merit now a wage is paid of debt, not according to grace, but would
understand and confess that even that very good purpose, which the
grace which follows assists could not have been in the man if grace
had not preceded it. For how is there a good purpose in a man without
the mercy of God first, since it is that very good will which is
prepared by the Lord? [2812] But when they had said this, "that grace
also assists every one's good purpose," and presently added, "yet does
not infuse the love of virtue into a resisting heart," it might be
fitly understood, if it were not said by those whose meaning is known.
For, for the resisting heart a hearing for the divine call is first
procured by the grace of God itself, and then in that heart, now no
more resisting, the desire of virtue is kindled. Nevertheless, in all
things which any one does according to God, His mercy precedes him.
And this they will not have, because they choose to be not catholics,
but Pelagians. For it much delights a proud impiety, that even that
which a man is forced to confess to be given by the Lord should seem
to be not bestowed on himself, but repaid; so that, to wit, the
children of perdition, not of the promise, may be thought themselves
to have made themselves good, and God to have repaid to those who are
now good, having been made so by themselves, the reward due for that
their work.

Footnotes

[2811] See above, Book ii. ch. 11.
[2812] Prov. viii. 35.

Chapter 14.--The Testimonies of Scripture in Favour of Grace.

For that very pride has so stopped the ears of their heart that they
do not hear, "For what hast thou that thou hast not received?" [2813]
They do not hear, "Without me ye can do nothing;" [2814] they do not
hear, "Love is of God;" [2815] they do not hear, "God hath dealt the
measure of faith;" [2816] they do not hear, "The Spirit breatheth
where it will," [2817] and, "They who are led by the Spirit of God,
they are the sons of God;" [2818] they do not hear, "No one can come
unto me, unless it were given him of my Father;" [2819] they do not
hear what Esdras writes, "Blessed is the Lord of our fathers, who hath
put into the heart of the king to glorify His house which is in
Jerusalem;" [2820] they do not hear what the Lord says by Jeremiah,
"And I will put my fear into their heart, that they depart not from
me; and I will visit them to make them good;" [2821] and specially
that word by Ezekiel the prophet, where God fully shows that He is
induced by no good deservings of men to make them good, that is,
obedient to His commands, but rather that He repays to them good for
evil, by doing this for His own sake, and not for theirs. For He says,
"These things saith the Lord God: I do not this for your sakes, O
house of Israel, but for mine own holy name's sake, which has been
profaned among the nations, whither ye have gone in there; and I will
sanctify my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and
which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the nations shall
know that I am the Lord, saith Adonai the Lord, when I shall be
sanctified among you before their eyes. And I will take you from among
the nations, and gather you together out of all lands, and will bring
you into your own land. And I will sprinkle upon you clean water, and
ye shall be cleansed from all your filthiness, and I will cleanse you.
And I will give unto you a new heart, and a new spirit will I put
within you: and the stony heart shall be taken away out of your flesh,
and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within
you, and will cause you to walk in my righteousness, and to observe my
judgments, and do them." [2822] And after a few words, by the same
prophet He says, "Not for your sakes do I do this, saith the Lord God;
it shall be known unto you: be ye confounded and blush for your ways,
O house of Israel. These things saith the Lord God: In the day in
which I shall cleanse you from all your iniquities, and shall ordain
cities, and the wilderness shall be built, and the desolated land
shall be tilled, whereas it was desolated before the eyes of every
passer by. And they shall say, This land that was desolated has become
as a garden of pleasure; and the wasted and desolated and ruined
cities have settled down fortified. And whatever nations have been
left round about you shall know that I the Lord have built the ruined
places, I have planted the desolated places: I the Lord have spoken,
and have done it. Thus saith the Lord: I will yet for this inquire of
the house of Israel, that I may do it for them; I will multiply them
men like sheep, as holy sheep, as the sheep of Jerusalem in the days
of her feast; so shall be those desolated cities full of men as sheep:
and they shall know that I am the Lord." [2823]

Chapter 15.--From Such Scriptures Grace is Proved to Be Gratuitous and
Effectual.

What remained to the carrion skin whence it might be puffed up, and
could disdain when it glories to glory in the Lord? [2824] What
remained to it, when whatsoever it shall have said that it has done in
such a way that after that preceding merit of man had originated from
man, God should subsequently do that of which the man is
deserving,--it shall be answered, it shall be exclaimed against, it
shall be contradicted, "I do it; but for my own holy name's sake; not
for your sakes, do I do it, saith the Lord God"? [2825] Nothing so
overturns the Pelagians when they say that the grace of God is given
in respect of our merits. Which, indeed, Pelagius himself condemned,
[2826] and if not by correcting it, yet by being afraid of the Eastern
judges. Nothing so overturns the presumption of men who say, "We do
it, that we may deserve those things with which God may do it." It is
not Pelagius that answers you, but the Lord Himself, "I do it and not
for your sakes, but for my own holy name's sake." [2827] For what good
can ye do out of a heart which is not good? But that you may have a
good heart, He says, "I will give you a new heart, and I will put a
new Spirit within you." Can you say, We will first walk in His
righteousness, and will observe His judgment, and will do so that we
may be worthy, such as He should give His grace to? But what good
would ye evil men do, and how should you do those good things, unless
you were yourselves good? But who causes that men should be good save
Him who said, "And I will visit them to make them good"? and who said
"I will put my Spirit within you, and will cause you to walk in my
righteousness, and to observe my judgments, and do them"? Are ye thus
not yet awake? Do ye not yet hear, "I will cause you to walk, I will
make you to observe," lastly, "I will make you to do"? What! are you
still puffing yourselves up? We indeed walk, it is true; we observe;
we do; but He makes us to walk, to observe, to do. This is the grace
of God making us good; this is His mercy preventing us. What do waste
and desolated and dug-up places deserve, which yet shall be built and
tilled and fortified? Are these things for the merits of their
wasteness, their desolation, their uprooting? Far from it. For such
things as these are evil deservings, while those gifts are good.
Therefore good things are given for evil ones--gratuitous, therefore;
not of debt, and therefore grace. "I," saith the Lord: "I, the Lord."
Does not such a word as that restrain you, O human pride, when you
say, I do such things as to deserve from the Lord to be built and
planted? Do you not hear, "I do it not on your account; I the Lord
have built up the destroyed cities, and I have planted the desolated
lands; I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, yet not for your
sakes, but for my own holy name's sake"? Who multiplies men as sheep,
as holy sheep, as the sheep of Jerusalem? Who causes those desolated
cities to be full of men as sheep, save He who goes on, and says, "And
they shall know that I am the Lord"? But with what men as sheep does
He fill the cities as He promised? those which He finds, or those
which He makes? Let us interrogate the Psalm; lo, it answers; let us
hear: "O come, let us worship and fall down before Him: and let us
weep before the Lord who made us; because He is our God, and we are
the people of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand." [2828] He
therefore makes the sheep, with which He may fill the desolated
cities. What wonder, when, indeed, to that single sheep, that is, the
Church whose members are all the human sheep, it is said, "Because I
am the Lord who make thee"? What do you pretend to me of free will,
which will not be free to do righteousness, unless you should be a
sheep? He then who makes men His sheep, He frees the wills of men for
the obedience of piety.

Footnotes

Chapter 16.--Why God Makes of Some Sheep, Others Not.

But wherefore does God make these men sheep, and those not, since with
Him there is no acceptance of persons? This is the very question which
the blessed apostle thus answers to those who propose it with more
curiosity than propriety, "O man, who art thou that repliest against
God? Does the thing formed say to him that formed it, Wherefore hast
thou made me thus?" [2829] This is the very question which belongs to
that depth desiring to look into which the same apostle was in a
certain measure terrified, and exclaimed, "Oh the depth of the riches
of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His
judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind
of the Lord? or who has been His counsellor? Or who has first given to
Him, that it should be recompensed to Him again? Because of Him, and
through Him, and in Him, are all things: to Him be glory for ages of
ages." [2830] Let them not, then, dare to pry into that unsearchable
question who defend merit before grace, and therefore even against
grace, and wish first to give unto God, that it may be given to them
again,--first, of course, to give something of free will, that grace
may be given them again as a reward; and let them wisely understand or
faithfully believe that even what they think that they have first
given, they have received from Him, from whom are all things, by whom
are all things, in whom are all things. But why this man should
receive, and that should not receive, when neither of them deserves to
receive, and whichever of them receives, receives undeservingly,--let
them measure their own strength, and not search into things too strong
for them. Let it suffice them to know that there is no unrighteousness
with God. For when the apostle could find no merits for which Jacob
should take precedence of his twin-brother with God, he said, "What,
then, shall we say? Is there unrighteousness with God? Away with the
thought! For He says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have
mercy, and I will show compassion on whom I will show compassion.
Therefore it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of God that showeth mercy." [2831] Let, therefore, His free compassion
be grateful to us, even although this profound question be still
unsolved; which, nevertheless, is so far solved as the same apostle
solves it, saying, "But if God, willing to show His wrath, and to
demonstrate His power, endured in much patience the vessels of wrath
which are fitted to destruction; and that He might make known the
riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He has prepared for
glory." [2832] Certainly wrath is not repaid unless it is due, lest
there be unrighteousness with God; but mercy, even when it is
bestowed, and not due, is not unrighteousness with God. And hence, let
the vessels of mercy understand how freely mercy is afforded to them,
because to the vessels of wrath with whom they have common cause and
measure of perdition, is repaid wrath, righteous and due. This is now
enough in opposition to those who, by freedom of will, desire to
destroy the liberality of grace.

Footnotes

Chapter 17 [VII.]--Of the Praise of the Saints.

In that, indeed, in the praise of the saints, they will not drive us
with the zeal of that publican [2833] to hunger and thirst after
righteousness, but with the vanity of the Pharisees, as it were, to
overflow with sufficiency and fulness; what does it profit them
that--in opposition to the Manicheans, who do away with baptism--they
say "that men are perfectly renewed by baptism," and apply the
apostle's testimony for this,--"who testifies that, by the washing of
water, the Church is made holy and spotless from the Gentiles," [2834]
--when, with a proud and perverse meaning, they put forth their
arguments in opposition to the prayers of the Church itself. For they
say this in order that the Church may be believed after holy
baptism--in which is accomplished the forgiveness of all sins--to have
no further sin; when, in opposition to them, from the rising of the
sun even to its setting, in all its members it cries to God, "Forgive
us our debts." [2835] But if they are interrogated regarding
themselves in this matter, they find not what to answer. For if they
should say that they have no sin, John answers them, that they deceive
themselves, and the truth is not in them. [2836] But if they confess
their sins, since they wish themselves to be members of Christ's body,
how will that body, that is, the Church, be even in this time
perfectly, as they think, without spot or wrinkle, if its members
without falsehood confess themselves to have sins? Wherefore in
baptism all sins are forgiven, and, by that very washing of water in
the word, the Church is set forth in Christ without spot or wrinkle;
[2837] and unless it were baptized, it would fruitlessly say, "Forgive
us our debts," until it be brought to glory, when there is in it
absolutely no spot or wrinkle. [2838]

Chapter 18.--The Opinion of the Saints Themselves About Themselves.

It is to be confessed that "the Holy Spirit, even in the old times,"
not only "aided good dispositions," which even they allow, but that it
even made them good, which they will not have. "That all, also, of the
prophets and apostles or saints, both evangelical and ancient, to whom
God gives His witness, were righteous, not in comparison with the
wicked, but by the rule of virtue," is not doubtful. And this is
opposed to the Manicheans, who blaspheme the patriarchs and prophets;
but what is opposed to the Pelagians is, that all of these, when
interrogated concerning themselves while they lived in the body, with
one most accordant voice would answer, "If we should say that we have
no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." [2839] "But
in the future time," it is not to be denied "that there will be a
reward as well of good works as of evil, and that no one will be
commanded to do the commandments there which here he has contemned,"
but that a sufficiency of perfect righteousness where sin cannot be, a
righteousness which is here hungered and thirsted after by the saints,
is here hoped for in precept, is there received as a reward, on the
entreaty of alms and prayers; so that what here may have been wanting
in fulfilment of the commandments may become unpunished for the
forgiveness of sin. [2840]

Footnotes

[2839] 1 John i. 8.
[2840] See above, Book iii. 17.

Chapter 19.--The Craft of the Pelagians.

And if these things be so, let the Pelagians cease by their most
insidious praises of these five things--that is, the praise of the
creature, the praise of marriage, the praise of the law, the praise of
free will, the praise of the saints--from feigning that they desire to
pluck men, as it were, from the little snares of the Manicheans, in
order that they may entangle them in their own nets--that is, that
they may deny original sin; may begrudge to infants the aid of Christ
the physician; may say that the grace of God is given according to our
merits, and thus that grace is no more grace; and may say that the
saints in this life had not sin, and thus make the prayer of none
effect which He gave to the saints who had no sin, and by which all
sin is pardoned to the saints that pray unto Him. To these three evil
doctrines, they by their deceitful praise of these five good things
seduce careless and unlearned men. Concerning all which things, I
think I have sufficiently censured their most cruel and wicked and
proud vanity.

Chapter 20 [VIII.]--The Testimonies of the Ancients Against the
Pelagians.

But since they say "that their enemies have taken up our words for
hatred of the truth," and complained that "throughout nearly the whole
of the West a dogma not less foolish than impious is taken up, and
from simple bishops sitting in their places without a Synodal
congregation a subscription is extorted to confirm this
dogma,"--although the Church of Christ, both Western and Eastern
shuddered at the profane novelties of their words--I think it belongs
to my care not only to avail myself of the sacred canonical Scriptures
as witnesses against them, which I have already sufficiently done,
but, moreover, to bring forward some proofs from the writings of the
holy men who before us have treated upon those Scriptures with the
most widespread reputation and great glory. Not that I would put the
authority of any controversialist on a level with the canonical books,
as if there were nothing which is better or more truly thought by one
catholic than by another who likewise is a catholic; but that those
may be admonished who think that these men say anything as it used to
be said, before their empty talk on these subjects, by catholic
teachers following the divine oracles, and may know that the true and
anciently established catholic faith is by us defended against the
receding presumption and mischief of the Pelagian heretics.

Chapter 21.--Pelagius, in Imitation of Cyprian, Wrote a Book of
Testimonies.

Even that heresiarch of these men, Pelagius himself, mentions with the
honour that is certainly due to him, the most blessed Cyprian, most
glorious with even the crown of martyrdom, not only in the African and
the Western, but also in the Eastern Churches, well known by the
report of fame, and by the diffusion far and wide of his
writings,--when, writing a book of testimonies, [2841] he asserts that
he is imitating him, saying that "he was doing to Romanus what Cypria
had done to Quirinus." Let us, then, see what Cyprian thought
concerning original sin, which entered by one man into the world. In
the epistle on "Works and Alms" [2842] he thus speaks: "When the Lord
at His advent had cured these wounds which Adam had introduced, and
had healed the old poisons of the serpent, He gave a law to the sound
man, and bade him sin no more, lest a worse thing should happen to him
if he sinned. We had been limited and shut up into a narrow space by
the commandment of innocence; nor would the infirmity and weakness of
human frailty have any resource unless the divine mercy coming once
more in aid should open some way of securing salvation by pointing out
works of justice and mercy, so that by alms-giving we may wash away
whatever foulness we subsequently contract." By this testimony this
witness refutes two falsehoods of theirs,--the one, wherein they say
that the human race draws no sin from Adam which needs cure and
healing through Christ; the other, in which they say that the saints
have no sin after baptism. Again, in the same epistle [2843] he says,
"Let each one place before his eyes the devil with his servants,--that
is, with the people of perdition and death,--as springing forth into
the midst and provoking the people of Christ,--Himself being present
and judging,--with the trial of comparison in these words: `I, on
behalf of those whom thou seest with me, neither received buffets, nor
bore scourgings, nor endured the cross, nor shed my blood, nor
redeemed my family at the price of my suffering and blood; but neither
do I promise them a celestial kingdom, nor do I recall them to
Paradise, having again restored to them immortality.'" Let the
Pelagians answer and say when we could have been in the immortality of
Paradise, and how we could have been expelled thence so as to be
recalled thither by the grace of Christ. And, although they may be
unable to find what they can answer in this case on behalf of their
own perversity, let them observe in what manner Cyprian understood
what the apostle says, "In whom all have sinned." And let not the
Pelagian heretics, freed from the old Manichean heretics, dare to
suggest any calumny against a catholic, lest they should be convicted
of doing so wicked a wrong even to the ancient martyr Cyprian.

Footnotes

[2841] That is, his Capitula. See On the Proceedings of Pelagius, 6.
[2842] Work cited, ch. 1; see The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. v. p. 476.
[2843] Work cited, ch. 22; in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. v. p. 482.

Chapter 22.--Further References to Cyprian.

For he says also this in the epistle whose title is inscribed, "On the
Mortality:" [2844] "The kingdom of God, beloved brethren, is beginning
to be at hand; the reward of life, and the rejoicing of eternal
salvation and perpetual gladness, and the possession formerly lost of
Paradise, are now coming with the passing away of the world." This
again, in the same epistle, he says: "Let us greet the day which
assigns each of us to his own home, which snatches us hence and sets
us free from the snares of the world, and restores us to Paradise and
the kingdom." Moreover, he says in the epistle concerning Patience:
"Let the judgment of God be pondered, which, even in the beginning of
the world and of the human race, Adam, forgetful of the commandment
and a transgressor of the law that had been given, received. Then we
shall know how patient in this life we ought to be, who are born in
such a state that we labour here with afflictions and contests.
Because, says He, `thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and
hast eaten of the tree of which alone I had charged thee that thou
shouldest not eat, cursed shall be the ground in all thy works: in
sorrow and in groaning shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.
Thorns and thistles shall it give forth to thee, and thou shall eat
the food of the field. In the sweat of thy face thou shalt eat thy
bread, till thou return unto the ground from which thou wast taken:
for earth thou art, and unto earth shalt thou go.' We are all tied and
bound with the chain of this sentence until, death being destroyed, we
depart from this world." [2845] And, moreover, in the same epistle he
says: "For, since in that first transgression of the commandment
strength of body departed with immortality, and weakness came on with
death, and strength cannot be received unless when immortality also
has been received, it behoves us in this bodily frailty and weakness
always to struggle and fight; and this struggle and encounter cannot
be sustained but by the strength of patience." [2846]

Footnotes

Chapter 23.--Further References to Cyprian.

And in the epistle which he wrote with sixty-six of his joint-bishops
to Bishop Fidus, when he was consulted by him in respect of the law of
circumcision, whether an infant might be baptized before the eighth
day, this matter is treated in such a way as if by a divine
forethought the catholic Church would already confute the Pelagian
heretics who would appear so long afterwards. For he who had consulted
had no doubt on the subject whether children on birth inherited
original sin, which they might wash away by being born again. For be
it far from the Christian faith to have at any time doubted on this
matter. But he was in doubt whether the washing of regeneration, by
which he made no question but that original sin was put away, ought to
be given before the eighth day. To which consultation the most blessed
Cyprian in reply said: "But as regards the case of infants, which you
say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after
their birth, and that the law of the ancient circumcision should be
regarded, so that you think that one who is born should not be
baptized and sanctified within the eighth day, we all thought very
differently in our council. For to the course which you thought was to
be taken no one agreed, but we all rather judged that the grace of a
merciful God was not to be denied to any one born of men; for, as the
Lord says in His gospel, `the Son of man is not come to destroy men's
lives, but to save them.' [2847] As far as we can, we must strive
that, if possible, no soul be lost." [2848] And a little afterwards he
says: "Nor ought any of us to shudder at what God hath condescended to
make. For although the infant is still fresh from its birth, yet it is
not such that any one should shudder at kissing it in giving grace and
in making peace, since in the kiss of an infant every one of us ought
for his very religion's sake to consider the still recent hands of God
themselves, which in some sort we are kissing in the man just formed
and newly born, when we are embracing that which God has made." [2849]
A little after, also, he says: "But if anything could hinder men from
obtaining grace, their more heinous sins might rather hinder those who
are mature and grown up and older. But again, if even to the greatest
sinners, and to those who have before sinned much against God, when
they have subsequently believed, remission of sins is granted, and
nobody is hindered from baptism and from grace; how much rather ought
we to shrink from hindering an infant, who, being lately born, has not
sinned, except that, being born after the flesh according to Adam, he
has contracted the contagion of the ancient death at his earliest
birth; who approaches more easily on this very account to the
reception of the forgiveness of sins, in that to him are remitted not
his own sins, but the sins of another!" [2850]

Footnotes

Chapter 24.--The Dilemma Proposed to the Pelagians.

What will be said to such things as these, by those who are not only
the forsakers, but also the persecutors of God's grace? What will they
say to such things as these? On what ground is the "possession of
Paradise" restored to us? How are we restored to Paradise if we have
never been there? Or how have we been there, except because we were
there in Adam? And how do we belong to that "judgment" which was
spoken against the transgressor, if we do not inherit injury from the
transgressor? Finally, he thinks that infants are to be baptized, even
before the eighth day; lest "by the contagion of the ancient death,
contracted in the first birth," the souls of the infants should
perish. How do they perish if they who are born even of believing men
are not held by the devil until they are born again in Christ, and
plucked out from the power of darkness, and transferred into His
kingdom? And who says that the souls of those who are born will perish
unless they are born again? No other than he who so praises the
Creator and the creature, the workman and the work, as to restrain and
correct the horror of human feeling with which men refuse to kiss
infants fresh from the womb, by interposing the veneration of the
Creator Himself, saying that in the kiss of infants of that age the
recent hands of God were to be considered! Did he, then, in confessing
original sin, condemn either nature or marriage? Did he, because he
applied to the infant born guilty from Adam, the cleansing of
regeneration, therefore deny God as the Creator of those that were
born? Because, in his dread that souls of any age whatever should
perish, he, with his council of colleagues, decided that even before
the eighth day they were to be delivered by the sacrament of baptism,
did he therefore accuse marriage, when, indeed, in the case of an
infant,--whether born of marriage or of adultery, yet because it was
born a man,--he declared that the recent hands of God were worthy even
of the kiss of peace? If, then, the holy bishop and most glorious
martyr Cyprian could think that original sin in infants must be healed
by the medicine of Christ, without denying the praise of the creature,
without denying the praise of marriage, why does a novel pestilence,
although it does not dare to call such an one as him a Manichean,
think that another person's fault is to be objected against catholics
who maintain these things, in order to conceal its own? So the most
lauded commentator on the divine declarations, before even the
slightest taint of the Manichean plague had touched our lands, without
any reproach of the divine work and of marriage, confesses original
sin,--not saying that Christ was stained with any spot of sin, nor yet
comparing with Him the flesh of sin in others that were born, to whom
by means of the likeness of sinful flesh He might afford the aid of
cleansing; neither is he deterred by the obscure question of the
origin of souls, from confessing that those who are made free by the
grace of Christ return into Paradise. Does he say that the condition
of death passed upon men from Adam without the contagion of sin? For
it is not on account of avoiding the death of the body, but on account
of the sin which entered by one man into the world, [2851] that he
says that help is to be afforded by baptism to infants, however fresh
they may be from the womb.

Footnotes

[2851] Rom. v. 12.

Chapter 25 [IX.]--Cyprian's Testimonies Concerning God's Grace.

But now it plainly appears in what way Cyprian proclaims the grace of
God against such as these, when he is arguing about the Lord's Prayer.
For he says: "We say, `May Thy name be made holy,' [2852] not that we
wish for God that He may be made holy by our prayers, but that we
beseech of Him that His name may be made holy in us. But by whom is
God made holy, since He Himself makes holy? But, because He says, `Be
ye holy, because I also am holy,' we ask and entreat this, that we who
were made holy in baptism may continue in that which we have begun to
be." [2853] And in another place in the same epistle he says: "We add
also, and say, `Thy will be done in heaven, and in earth,' not in
order that God may do what He wills, but that we may be able to do
what God wills. For who resists God that He may not do what He wills?
But, since we are hindered by the devil from obeying God with our
thought and deed in all things, we pray and ask that God's will may be
done in us. And that it may be done in us, we have need of God's will,
that is, of His help and protection; since no one is strong in his own
strength, but he is safe by the indulgence and mercy of God." [2854]
In another place also: "Moreover, we ask that the will of God may be
done both in heaven and in earth, each of which things pertains to the
fulfilment of our safety and salvation. For since we possess the body
from the earth, and the spirit from heaven, we are ourselves earth and
heaven; and in both, that is, both in body and in spirit, we pray that
God's will be done. For between the flesh and the spirit there is a
struggle, and there is a daily strife as they disagree one with the
other; so that we cannot do the very things that we would, in that the
spirit seeks heavenly and divine things, while the flesh lusts after
earthly and temporal things. And, therefore, we ask that, by the help
and assistance of God, agreement may be made between these two
natures; so that while the will of God is done both in the spirit and
in the flesh, the soul which is newborn by Him may be preserved. And
this the Apostle Paul openly and manifestly declares by his words.
`The flesh,' says he, `lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit
against the flesh; for these are contrary the one to the other, so
that ye cannot do the things that ye would.'" [2855] And a little
after he says: "And it may be thus understood, most beloved brethren,
that since the Lord commands and teaches us even to love our enemies,
and to pray even for those who persecute us, we should ask even for
those who are still earth, and have not yet begun to be heavenly, that
even in respect of these God's will may be done, which Christ
accomplished in preserving and renewing humanity." [2856] And again,
in another place he says: "But we ask that this bread should be given
to us daily, that we who are in Christ, and daily receive the
Eucharist for the food of salvation, may not, by the interposition of
some more heinous sin,--by being prevented, as those abstaining and
not communicating, from partaking of the heavenly bread,--be separated
from Christ's body." [2857] And a little afterwards, in the same
treatise he says: "But when we ask that we may not come into
temptation, we are reminded of our infirmity and weakness, while we so
ask as that no one should insolently vaunt himself; that none should
proudly and arrogantly assume anything to himself; that none should
take to himself the glory either of confession or of suffering as his
own, when the Lord Himself teaching humility said, `Watch and pray,
that ye come not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but
the flesh is weak;' [2858] so that while a humble and submissive
confession comes first, and all is attributed to God, whatever is
sought for suppliantly, with fear and honour of God, may be granted by
His own loving-kindness." [2859] Moreover, in his treatise addressed
to Quirinus, in respect to which work Pelagius wishes himself to
appear as his imitator, he says in the Third Book "that we must boast
in nothing, since nothing is our own." [2860] And subjoining the
divine testimonies to this proposition, he added among others that
apostolic word with which especially the mouths of such as these must
be closed: "For what hast thou, which thou hast not received? But if
thou hast received it, why boastest thou as if thou hadst not received
it?" Also in the epistle concerning Patience he says: "For we have
this virtue in common with God. From Him patience begins; from Him its
glory and its dignity take their rise. The origin and greatness of
patience proceed from God as its Author." [2861]

Chapter 26.--Further Appeals to Cyprian's Teaching.

Does that holy and so memorable instructor of the Churches in the word
of truth, deny that there is free will in men, because he attributes
to God the whole of your righteous living? Does he reproach God's law,
because he intimates that man is not justified by it, seeing that he
declares that what that law commands must be obtained from the Lord
God by prayers? Does he assert fate under the name of grace, by saying
that we must boast in nothing, since nothing is our own? Does he, like
these, believe that the Holy Spirit is in such wise the aider of
virtue, as if that very virtue which it assists springs from
ourselves, when, asserting that nothing is our own, he mentions in
this respect that the apostle said, "For what hast thou that thou hast
not received?" and says that the most excellent virtue, that is,
patience, does not begin from us, and afterwards receive aid by the
Spirit of God, but from Him Himself takes its source, from Him takes
its origin? Finally, he confesses that neither good purpose, nor
desire of virtue, nor good dispositions, begin to be in men without
God's grace, when he says that "we must boast in nothing, since
nothing is our own." What is so established in free will as what the
law says, that we must not worship an idol, must not commit adultery,
must do no murder? Nay, these crimes, and such like, are of such a
kind that, if any one should commit them, he is removed from the
communion of the body of Christ. And yet, if the blessed Cyprian
thought that our own will was sufficient for not committing these
crimes, he would not in such wise understand what we say in the Lord's
Prayer, "Give us this day our daily bread," as that he should assert
that we ask "that we may not by the interposition of some heinous
sin--by being prevented as abstaining, and not communicating, from
partaking of the heavenly bread--be separated from Christ's body." Let
these new heretics answer of a surety what good merit precedes, in men
who are enemies of the name of Christ? For not only have they no good
merit, but they have, moreover, the very worst merit. And yet, Cyprian
even thus understands what we say in the prayer, "Thy will be done in
heaven, and in earth:" that we pray also for those very persons who in
this respect are called earth. We pray, therefore, not only for the
unwilling, but also for the objecting and resisting. What, then, do we
ask, but that from unwilling they may be made willing; from objecting,
consenting; from resisting, loving? And by whom, but by Him of whom it
is written, "The will is prepared by God"? [2862] Let them, then, who
disdain, if they do not do any evil and if they do any good, to glory,
not in themselves, but in the Lord, learn to be catholics.

Footnotes

Let us, then, see that third point, which in these men is not less
shocking to every member of Christ and to His whole body,--that they
contend that there are in this life, or that there have been,
righteous men having absolutely no sin. [2863] In which presumption
they most manifestly contradict the Lord's Prayer, wherein, with
truthful heart and with daily words, all the members of Christ cry
aloud, "Forgive us our debts." Let us see, then, what Cyprian, most
glorious in the Lord, thought of this,--what he not only said for the
instruction of the Churches, not, of course, of the Manicheans, but of
the catholics, but also committed to letters and to memory. In the
epistle on "Works and Alms," he says: "Let us then acknowledge,
beloved brethren, the wholesome gift of the divine mercy, and let us
who cannot be without some wound of conscience heal our wounds by the
spiritual remedies for the cleansing and purging of our sins. Nor let
any one so flatter himself with the notion of a pure and immaculate
heart, as, in dependence on his own innocence, to think that the
medicine needs not to be applied to his wounds; since it is written,
`Who shall boast that he hath a clean heart, or who shall boast that
he is pure from sins?' [2864] And again, in his epistle, John lays it
down and says, `If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,
and the truth is not in us.' [2865] But if no one can be without sin,
and whoever should say that he is without fault is either proud or
foolish, how needful, how kind is the divine mercy, which, knowing
that there are still found some wounds in those that have been healed,
has given even after their healing wholesome remedies for the curing
and healing of their wounds anew!" [2866] Again, in the same treatise
he says: "And since there cannot fail daily to be sins committed in
the sight of God, there failed not daily sacrifices wherewith the sins
might be cleansed away." [2867] Also, in the treatise on the
Mortality, he says: "Our warfare is with avarice, with immodesty, with
anger, with ambition; our trying and toilsome wrestling with carnal
vices, with the enticements of the world. The mind of man besieged,
and on every hand invested with the onsets of the devil, scarcely
meets the repeated attacks, scarcely resists them. If avarice is
prostrated, lust springs up. If lust is overcome, ambition takes its
place. If ambition is despised, anger exasperates, pride puffs up,
wine-bibbing entices; envy breaks concord; jealousy cuts friendship;
you are constrained to curse, which the divine law forbids; you are
compelled to swear, which is not lawful. So many persecutions the soul
suffers daily, with so many risks is the heart wearied; and yet it
delights to abide here long among the devil's weapons, although it
should rather be our craving and wish to hasten to Christ by the aid
of a quicker death." [2868] Again, in the same treatise he says: "The
blessed Apostle Paul in his epistle lays it down, saying, `To me to
live is Christ, and to die is gain;' [2869] counting it the greatest
gain no longer to be held by the snares of this world, no longer to be
liable to the sins and vices of the flesh." [2870] Moreover, on the
Lord's Prayer, explaining what it is we ask when we say, "Hallowed be
thy name," he says, among other matters: "For we have need of daily
sanctification, that we, who daily fall away, may wash out our sins by
continual sanctification." [2871] Again, in the same treatise, when he
would explain our saying, "Forgive us our debts," he says: "And how
necessarily, how providently and salutarily, are we admonished that we
are sinners, since we are compelled to entreat for our sins; and while
pardon is asked for from God, the soul recalls its own consciousness
of guilt. Lest any one should flatter himself as being innocent, and
by exalting himself should more deeply perish, he is instructed and
taught that he sins daily, in that he is bidden to entreat daily for
his sins. Thus, moreover, John also in his epistle warns us, and says:
`If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us. But if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to
forgive us our sins.'" [2872] Rightly, also, he proposed in his letter
to Quirinus his own most absolute judgment on this subject, to which
he subjoined the divine testimonies, "That no one is without filth and
without sin." [2873] There also he set down those testimonies by which
original sin is confirmed, which these men endeavour to twist into I
know not what new and evil meanings, whether what the holy Job says,
"No one is pure from filth, not one even if his life be of one day
upon the earth," [2874] or what is read in the Psalm, "Behold, I was
conceived in iniquity; and in sins hath my mother nourished me in the
womb." [2875] To which testimonies, on account of those also who are
already holy in mature age, since even they are not without filth and
sin, he added also that word of the most blessed John, which he often
mentions in many other places besides, "If we say that we have no sin,
we deceive ourselves;" [2876] and other passages of the same
sentiment, which are asserted by all catholics, by way of opposing
those "who deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them."

Chapter 28.--Cyprian's Orthodoxy Undoubted.

Let the Pelagians say, if they dare, that this man of God was
perverted by the error of the Manicheans, in so praising the saints as
yet to confess that no one in this life had attained to such a
perfection of righteousness as to have no sin at all, confirming his
judgment by the clear truth and divine authority of the canonical
testimonies. For does he deny that in baptism all sins are forgiven,
because he confesses that there remain frailty and infirmity, whence
he says that we sin after baptism and even to the end of this life,
having unceasing conflict with the vices of the flesh? Or did he not
remember what the apostle said about the Church without spot, that he
prescribed that no one ought so to flatter himself in respect of a
pure and spotless heart as to trust in his own innocence, and think
that no medicine needed to be applied to his wounds? I think that
these new heretics may concede to this catholic man that he knew "that
the Holy Spirit even in the old times aided good dispositions;" nay,
even, what they themselves will not allow, that they could not have
possessed good dispositions except through the Holy Spirit. I think
that Cyprian knew that all the prophets and apostles or saints of any
kind soever who pleased the Lord at any time were righteous--"not in
comparison with the wicked," as they falsely assert that we say, "but
by the rule of virtue," as they boast that they say; although Cyprian
says, nevertheless, no one can be without sin, and whoever should
assert that he is blameless is either proud or a fool. Nor is it with
reference to anything else that he understands the Scripture, "Who
shall boast that he has a pure heart? or who shall boast that he is
pure from sins?" [2877] I think that Cyprian would not have needed to
be taught by such as these, what he very well knew, "that, in the time
to come, there would be a reward of good works and a punishment of
evil works, but that no one could then perform the commands which here
he might have despised;" and yet he does not understand and assert the
Apostle Paul, who was assuredly not a contemner of the divine
commands, to have said, "To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain,"
[2878] on any other account, except that he reckoned it the greatest
gain after this life no longer to be held in worldly entanglements, no
longer to be obnoxious to the sins and vices of the flesh. Therefore
the most blessed Cyprian felt, and in the truth of the divine
Scriptures saw, that even the life of the apostles themselves, however
good, holy, and righteous, suffered some involvements of worldly
entanglements, was obnoxious to some sins and vices of the flesh; and
that they desired death that they might be free from those evils, and
that they might attain to that perfect righteousness which would not
suffer such things, and which would no more have to be achieved in the
way of command merely, but to be received in the way of reward. For
not even when that shall have come for which we pray when we say, "Thy
kingdom come," will there be in that kingdom of God no righteousness;
since the apostle says, "The kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but
righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." [2879] Certainly
these three things are commanded among other divine precepts. Here
righteousness is prescribed to us when it is said, "Do righteousness;"
[2880] peace is prescribed when it is said, "Have peace among
yourselves;" [2881] joy is prescribed when it is said, "Rejoice in the
Lord always." [2882] Let, then, the Pelagians deny that these things
shall be in the kingdom of God, where we shall live without end; or
let them be so mad, if it appears good, as to contend that
righteousness, peace, and joy, will be such there as they are here to
the righteous. But if they both shall be, and yet shall not be the
same, assuredly here, in respect of the commandment of them, the doing
is to be cared for,--there the perfection is to be hoped for in the
way of reward; when, not being withheld by any earthly entanglements,
and being liable to no sins and vices of the flesh (on account of
which the apostle, as Cyprian received this testimony, said that to
die would be to him gain), we may perfectly love God, the
contemplation of whom will be face to face; we may also perfectly love
our neighbour, since, when the thoughts of the heart are made
manifest, no suspicion of any evil can disturb any one concerning any
one.

Footnotes

Chapter 29 [XI.]--The Testimonies of Ambrose Against the Pelagians and
First of All Concerning Original Sin.

But now also to the most glorious martyr Cyprian, let me add, for the
sake of more amply confuting these men, the most blessed Ambrose;
because even Pelagius praised him so much as to say that in his
writings could be found nothing to be blamed even by his enemies.
[2883] Since, then, the Pelagians say that there is no original sin
with which infants are born, and object to the catholics the guilt of
the Manichean heresy, who withstand them on behalf of the most ancient
faith of the Church, let this catholic man of God, Ambrose, praised
even by Pelagius himself in the truth of the faith, answer them
concerning this matter. When he was expounding the prophet Isaiah, he
says: "Christ was, therefore, without spot, because He was not stained
even in the usual condition itself of birth." [2884] And in another
place in the same work, speaking of the Apostle Peter, he says: "He
offered himself, which he thought before to be sin, asking for himself
that not only his feet but his head also should be washed, because he
had directly understood that by the washing of the feet, for those who
fell in the first man, the filth of the obnoxious succession was
abolished." [2885] Also in the same work he says: "It was preserved,
therefore, that of a man and woman, that is, by that mingling of
bodies, no one could be seen to be free from sin; but He who is free
from sin is free also from this kind of conception." Also writing
against the Novatians he says: "All of us men are born under sin. And
our very origin is in corruption, as you have it read in the words of
David, [2886] `For lo, I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins hath
my mother brought me forth.'" [2887] Also in the apology of the
prophet David, he says: "Before we are born we are spotted with
contagion, and before the use of light we receive the mischief of that
origin. We are conceived in iniquity." [2888] Also speaking of the
Lord, he says: "It was certainly fitting that He who was not to have
the sin of a bodily fall, should feel no natural contagion of
generation. Rightly, therefore, David with weeping deplored in himself
these defilements of nature, and the fact that the stain had begun in
man before his life." [2889] Again, in the Ark of Noah he says:
"Therefore by one Lord Jesus the coming salvation is declared to the
nations; for He only could be righteous, although every generation
should go astray, nor for any other reason than that, being born of a
virgin, He was not at all bound by the ordinance of a guilty
generation. `Behold,' he says, `I was conceived in iniquities; and in
sins has my mother brought me forth;' [2890] he who was esteemed
righteous beyond others so speaks. Whom, then, should I now call
righteous unless Him who is free from those chains, whom the bonds of
our common nature do not hold fast?" [2891] Behold, this holy man,
most approved, even by the witness of Pelagius, in the catholic faith,
condemned the Pelagians who deny original sin with such evidence as
this; and yet he does not with the Manicheans deny either God to be
the Creator of those who are born, or condemn marriage, which God
ordained and blessed.

Footnotes

[2883] See On the Grace of Christ, ch. 47.
[2884] This work is not extant.
[2885] This work is not extant.
[2886] Ps. li. 5.
[2887] On Penitence, Book i. ch. 13.
[2888] Apology of the Prophet David, ch. 56.
[2889] Ibid. ch. 57.
[2890] Ps. li. 5.
[2891] On Noah and the Ark, ch. 7 (?).

Chapter 30.--The Testimonies of Ambrose Concerning God's Grace.

The Pelagians say that merit begins from man by free will, to which
God repays the subsequent aid of grace. Let the venerable Ambrose here
also refute them, when he says, in his exposition of the prophet
Isaiah, "that human care without divine help is powerless for healing,
and needs a divine helper." Also, in the treatise which is inscribed,
"On the Avoidance of the World," [2892] he says: "Our discourse is
frequent on the avoidance of this world; and I wish that our
disposition were as cautious and careful as our discourse is easy. But
what is worse, the enticement of earthly lusts frequently creeps in,
and the flowing forth of vanities takes hold of the mind, so that the
very thing that you desire to avoid you think upon, and turn over in
your mind; and this it is difficult for a man to beware of, but to get
rid of it is impossible. Finally, that that is rather a matter to be
wished than to be accomplished the prophet testifies when he says,
`Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, and not to avarice.' [2893]
For our heart and our thoughts are not in our power, seeing that they
are suddenly forced forth and confuse the mind and the soul and draw
them in other directions from those which you have proposed for
them;--they recall to things of time, they suggest worldly things,
they obtrude voluptuous thoughts, they inweave seducing thoughts, and,
in the very season in which we are proposing to lift up our mind, vain
thoughts are intruded upon us, and we are cast down for the most part
to things of earth; and who is so happy as always to rise upwards in
his heart? And how can this be done without the divine help?
Absolutely in no manner. Finally, of old Scripture says the same
thing, `Blessed is the man whose help is of Thee, O Lord; in his heart
is going up.'" [2894] What can be said more openly and more
sufficiently? But lest the Pelagians perchance should answer that, in
that very point in which divine help is asked for, man's merit
precedes, saying that that very thing is merit, that by his prayer he
is desiring that divine grace should come to his assistance, let them
give heed to what the same holy man says in his exposition of Isaiah.
He says: "And to pray God is a spiritual grace; for no man says that
Jesus is the Lord, except in the Holy Spirit." [2895] Whence also,
expounding the Gospel according to Luke, [2896] he says: "You see
certainly that everywhere the power of the Lord cooperates with human
desires, so that no man can build without the Lord, no man can
undertake anything without the Lord." Because such a man as Ambrose
says this, and commends God's grace, as it is fitting for a son of
promise to do, with grateful piety, does he therefore destroy free
will? Or does he mean grace to be understood as the Pelagians in their
different discourses will have to appear nothing but law--so that, for
instance, God may be believed to help us not to do what we may know,
but to know what we may do? If they think that such a man of God as
this is of this mind, let them hear what he has said about the law
itself. In the book "On the Avoidance of the World," he says: "The law
could stop the mouth of all men; it could not convert their mind."
[2897] In another place also, in the same treatise, he says: "The law
condemns the deed; it does not take away its wickedness." [2898] Let
them see that this faithful and catholic man agrees with the apostle
who says, "Now we know that what things soever the law says, it says
to those who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and
all the world may become guilty before God. Because by the law no
flesh shall be justified in His sight." [2899] For from that apostolic
opinion Ambrose took and wrote these things.

Chapter 31.--The Testimonies of Ambrose on the Imperfection of Present
Righteousness.

But now, since the Pelagians say that there either are or have been
righteous men in this life who have lived without any sin, to such an
extent that the future life which is to be hoped for as a reward
cannot be more advanced or more perfect, let Ambrose here also answer
them and refute them. For, expounding Isaiah the Prophet in reference
to what is written, "I have begotten and brought up children, and they
have despised me," [2900] he undertook to dispute concerning the
generations which are of God, and in that argument he quoted the
testimony of John when he says, "He that is born of God sinneth not."
[2901] And, treating the same very difficult question, he says: "Since
in this world there is none who is free from sin; since John himself
says, `If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar.' [2902]
But if `they that are born of God sin not,' and if these words refer
to those of them who are in the world, it is necessary that we should
regard them as those numberless people who have obtained God's grace
by the regeneration of the laver. But yet, when the prophet says, `All
things are waiting upon Thee, that Thou mayest give them meat in
season. That Thou givest them they gather for themselves; when Thou
openest Thine hand, all things shall be filled with goodness. But when
Thou turnest away Thy face, they shall be troubled: Thou shall take
away their breath, and they shall fail, and shall be turned into their
dust. Thou shall send forth Thy Spirit, and they shall be created: and
Thou shalt renew the face of the earth,' [2903] such things as these
cannot seem to have been said of any time whatever but of that future
time, in which there shall be a new earth and a new heaven. Therefore
they shall be disturbed that they may take their beginning. `And when
Thou openest Thy hand all things shall be filled with goodness,' which
is not easily characteristic of this age. For concerning this age what
does Scripture say? `There is none that doeth good, no, not one.'
[2904] If, therefore, there are different generations,--and here the
very entrance into this life is the receiver of sins to such an extent
that even he who begot should be despised; while another generation
does not receive sins;--let us consider whether by any means there may
not be a regeneration for us after the course of this life,--of which
regeneration it is said, `In the regeneration when the Son of man
shall sit in the throne of His glory.' [2905] For as that is called
the regeneration of washing whereby we are renewed from the filth of
sins washed away, so that seems to be called a regeneration by which
we are purified from every stain of bodily materiality, and are
regenerated in the pure sense of the soul to life eternal; so that
every quality of regeneration may be purer than of that washing, so
that no suspicion of sins can fall either on a man's doings, or even
on his very thoughts themselves." Moreover, in another place in the
same work he says: "We see it to be impossible that any person created
in a body can be absolutely spotless, since even Paul says that he is
imperfect. For thus he has it: `Not that I have already received, or
am already perfect;' [2906] and yet after a little he says, `As many
of us, therefore, as are perfect.' [2907] Unless, perchance, there is
one perfection in this world, another after this is completed, of
which he says to the Corinthians, `When that which is perfect is
come;' [2908] and elsewhere, `Till we all come into the unity of the
faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, into the perfect man to
the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ.' [2909] As, then, the
apostle says that many are placed in this world who are perfect along
with him, but who, if you have regard to true perfection, could not be
perfect, since he says, `We see now through a mirror, enigmatically;
but then face to face: now I know in part; but then I shall know even
as also I am known:' [2910] so also there both are those who are
`spotless' in this world, and will be those who are `spotless' in the
kingdom of God, although certainly, if you consider it accurately, no
person can be spotless, because no person is without sin." Also in the
same he says: "We see that, while we live in this life, we ought to
purify ourselves and to seek God; and to begin from the purification
of our soul, and as it were to establish the foundations of virtue, so
that we may deserve to attain the perfection of our purgation after
this life." And again, in the same he says: "But laden and groaning,
who does not say, `O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from
the body of this death?' [2911] So with the same teacher we give all
varieties of interpretation. For if he is unhappy who recognises
himself as involved in the evils of the body, certainly everybody is
unhappy; for I should not call that man happy who, being confused with
any darkness of his mind, does not know his own condition. That,
moreover, has not absurdly come to be understood; for if a man who
knows himself is unhappy, assuredly all are wretched, because every
one either recognises his weakness by wisdom, or by folly is ignorant
of it." Moreover, in the treatise "On the Benefit of Death," he says:
[2912] "Let death work in us, in order that that may work life also, a
good life after death,--that is, a good life after victory, a good
life after the contest is finished; so that now no longer the law of
the flesh may know how to resist the law of the mind, that no longer
we may have any contention with the body of death." Again, in the same
treatise he says: "Therefore, because the righteous have this reward,
that they see the face of God, and that light which lightens every
man, let us henceforth put on the desire of this kind of reward, that
our soul may draw near to God, our prayer may draw near to Him, our
desire may cleave to Him, that we be not separated from Him. And
placed here as we are, let us by meditating, by reading, by seeking,
be united with God. Let us know Him as we can. For we know Him in part
here; because here all things are imperfect, there all are perfect;
here we are infants, there we shall be strong men. `We see,' says he,
`now through a mirror in an enigma, but then face to face.' Then, His
face being revealed, we shall be allowed to look upon the glory of
God, which now our souls, involved in the compacted dregs of this
body, and shadowed by some stains and filth of this flesh, cannot
clearly see. `For who,' He says, `shall see my face and live?' and
rightly. For if our eyes cannot bear the rays of the sun,--and if any
one should gaze too long on the region of the sun he is said to be
blinded,--if a creature cannot look upon a creature without deceit and
offence, how can he without his own peril look upon the glittering
face of the eternal Creator, covered as he is with the clothing of
this body? For who is justified in God's sight, when even the infant
of one day cannot be pure from sin, and no one can boast of his
integrity and pureness of heart?"

Chapter 32 [XII.]--The Pelagian's Heresy Arose Long After Ambrose.

It would be too long if I were to seek to mention everything which the
holy Ambrose said and wrote against this heresy of the Pelagians,
which was to arise so long afterwards; not indeed with a view to
answer them, but with a view to declare the catholic faith, and to
build up men in it. Moreover, I neither could nor ought to mention all
those things which Cyprian, most glorious in the Lord, wrote in his
letters, whereby it is shown how this which we hold is the true and
truly Christian and catholic faith, as it was delivered of old by the
Holy Scriptures, and so retained and kept by our fathers and even to
this time, in which these heretics have attempted to destroy it, and
as it will hereafter by God's good will be retained and kept. For that
these things and things of this kind were thus delivered to Cyprian,
and by Cyprian, is testified by the testimonies produced from his
letters; and that thus they were maintained up to our times is shown
by these things which Ambrose wrote about these matters before these
heretics had begun to rage, and catholic ears had shuddered at their
profane novelties which are everywhere; and that thus, moreover, they
shall be maintained hereafter, was declared with sufficient vigour
partly by the condemnation of such opinions as these, partly by their
correction. For whatever they may dare to mutter against the sound
faith of Cyprian and Ambrose, I do not think that they will break out
into such a madness as to dare to call those noted and memorable men
of God, Manicheans.

Chapter 33.--Opposition of the Manichean and Catholic Dogmas.

What is it, then, which in their raging blindness of mind they are now
spreading about, [2913] "that almost throughout the entire West a
dogma not less foolish than impious is taken up;" when by the mercy of
God and by His merciful governance of His Church, the catholic faith
has been so watchful that the dogma, "not less foolish than wicked,"
as of the Manicheans, so also of these heretics, should not be taken
up? So holy and learned catholic men, such as are attested to be so by
the report of the whole Church, praise both God's creation, and
marriage as ordained by Him, and the law given by Him by means of the
holy Moses, and the free will implanted into man's nature, and the
holy patriarchs and prophets, with due and fitting proclamation; all
which five things the Manicheans condemn, partly by denying, and
partly also by abominating. Whence it appears that these catholic
doctors were far removed from the notions of the Manicheans, and yet
they assert original sin; they assert God's grace above free will, as
antecedent to all merit, so as truly to afford a gratuitous divine
assistance; they assert that the saints lived righteously in this
flesh, in such wise that the help of prayer was necessary to them, by
which their daily sins might be forgiven; and that a perfected
righteousness which could not have sin would be in another life the
reward of those who should live righteously here.

Footnotes

[2913] See above, ch. 20.

Chapter 34.--The Calling Together of a Synod Not Always Necessary to
the Condemnation of Heresies.

What is it, then, that they say, that "subscription was extorted from
simple bishops sitting in their places without any Synodal
congregation"? Was subscription extorted against such heretics as
these from the most blessed and excellent men in the faith, Cyprian
and Ambrose, before such heretics as these were in existence?--seeing
that they overthrow their impious dogmas with such clearness that we
can scarcely find anything more manifest to say against them. Or,
indeed, was there any need of the congregation of a Synod to condemn
this open pest, as if no heresy could at any time be condemned except
by a Synodal congregation?--when, on the contrary, very few heresies
can be found for the sake of condemning which any such necessity has
arisen; and those have been many and incomparably more which have
deserved to be accused and condemned in the place where they arose,
and thence could be known and avoided over the rest of the lands. But
the pride of such as these, which lifts itself up so much against God
as not to be willing to glory in Him but rather in free will, is
understood as grasping also at this glory, that a Synod of the East
and West should be gathered together on their account. In fact, they
endeavour, forsooth, to disturb the catholic world, because, the Lord
being against them, they are unable to pervert it; when rather they
ought to have been trodden out wherever those wolves might have
appeared, by watchfulness and pastoral diligence, after a competent
and sufficient judgment made concerning them; whether with a view of
their being healed and changed, or with a view of their being shunned
by the safety and soundness of others, by the help of the Shepherd of
the sheep, who seeks the lost sheep also among the little ones, who
makes the sheep holy and righteous freely; who both providently
instructs them, although sanctified and justified, yet in their
frailty and infirmity to pray for a daily remission for their daily
sins, without which no one lives in this world, even although he may
live well; and mercifully listens to their prayers.
Also, see links to 600+ other Augustine Manuscripts:/believe/txv/earlyche.htm/believe/txv/earlychf.htm/believe/txv/earlychg.htm/believe/txv/earlychh.htm/believe/txv/earlychi.htm/believe/txv/earlychj.htm/believe/txv/earlychk.htm/believe/txv/earlychl.htm/believe/txv/earlychm.htm/believe/txv/earlychn.htm